Hybridity in Translated Chinese - A Corpus Analytical Framework

New Frontiers in Translation Studies
Guangrong Dai
Hybridity in
Translated
Chinese
A Corpus Analytical Framework
Series editor
Defeng Li
Centre for Translation Studies, SOAS, University of London,
London, United Kingdom
Centre for Studies of Translation, Interpreting and Cognition,

University of Macau, Macau SAR
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/11894
Guangrong Dai
Hybridity in Translated
Chinese
A Corpus Analytical Framework
Guangrong Dai
School of Humanities
Fujian University of Technology
Fuzhou
Fujian, China
ISSN 2197-8689 ISSN 2197-8697 (electronic)

ISBN 978-981-10-0741-5 ISBN 978-981-10-0742-2 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-0742-2
Library of Congress Control Number: 2016940366
© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or
dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt
from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained
herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
Printed on acid-free paper
This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Springer Science+Business Media Singapore Pte Ltd.
General Editor’s Preface
New Frontiers in Translation Studies, as its name suggests, is a Series which

focuses on new and emerging themes in Translation Studies. The last four decades
have witnessed a rapid growth of this fledgling discipline. This Series intends to
publish and promote these developments and provide readers with theories and
methods they need to carry out their own translation studies projects. Translation
Studies is now expanding into new or underexplored areas both in theories and
research methods. One recent development is the keen interest in translation
theories that transcend Eurocentrism. Translation Studies has for decades been
dominated by Western modes of understanding and theorizing about translation
and closed to models of other traditions. This is due to, as many have argued, the
“unavailability of reliable data and systematic analysis of translation activities in
non-European cultures” (Hung and Wakabayashi 2005). So in the past few years,
some scholars have attempted to make available literature on translation from non-
European traditions (Cheung 2006). Several conferences have been held with
themes devoted to Asian translation traditions. Besides, rather than developing
translation theories via a shift to focusing on non-Eurocentric approaches, efforts
have been directed towards investigating translation universals applicable across all
languages, cultures and traditions.
Modern Translation Studies has adopted an interdisciplinary approach from its
inception. Besides tapping into theories and concepts of neighbouring disciplines,
such as linguistics, anthropology, education, sociology, and literary studies, it has
also borrowed research models and methods from other disciplines. In the late
1970s, German translation scholars applied Think-aloud Protocols (TAPs) of cog-
nitive psychology in their investigation of translators’ mental processes, and more
recently, process researchers have incorporated into their research designs lab
methods, such as eye-tracker, EEG and fMRI. In the early 1990s, computational
and corpus linguistics was introduced into Translation Studies, which has since
generated a proliferation of studies on the so-called translation universals, translator
style, and features of translated language. Studies on interpreting and translation
v
vi General Editor’s Preface
education have also taken a data-based empirical approach and yielded interesting
and useful results.
As Translation Studies seeks further growth as an independent discipline and
recognition from outside the translation studies community, the interest to explore
beyond the Eurocentric translation traditions will continue to grow. So does the
need to adopt more data- and lab-based methods in the investigations of translation
and interpreting. It is therefore the intent of this Series to capture the newest
developments in these areas and promote research along these lines. The mono-
graphs or edited volumes in this Series will be selected either because of their focus
on non-European translation traditions or their application of innovative research
methods and models, or both.
We hope that translation teachers and researchers, as well as graduate students,
will use these books in order to get acquainted with new ideas and frontiers in
Translation Studies, carry out their own innovative projects and even contribute to
the Series with their pioneering research.
Fujian, China Defeng Li
References
Cheung, M. 2006. An anthology of Chinese discourse on translation, volume one: From earliest
times to the Buddhist project. Manchester/Kinderhook: St. Jerome Publishing.
Hung, E., and J. Wakabayashi. 2005. Asian translation traditions. Manchester/Northampton:
St Jerome Publishing.
Foreword
In 2007, the Scottish poet, James McGonigal, published a slim book of poetry
called Passage/An Pasiaste, the working title of which, he once told me in an
interview, had been ‘Poems written to be translated into an abandoned language’.
His inspiration, he said, was the experience of reading English translations of Scots
Gaelic poetry alongside their (to him) unfathomable source texts; he wanted his
own original poems to capture the same kind of foreignness or strangeness: ‘I
thought I would try to write poems out of that sort of consciousness, kind of in
translatorese language’.1 The resulting poetic sequence was written in a form of
English that appeared indebted to Scots Gaelic, a language that, in fact, McGonigal
had little knowledge of.
The point of this story for the present volume is that many of us have an
instinctive awareness of the strangeness of ‘translatorese’, or ‘translationese’, that
foreignised variety of language that emerges from the process of translation. While
recognizable, however, the characteristics of translationese have always remained
difficult to pin down. Many translation scholars have attempted to follow Mona
Baker’s approach to studying allegedly ‘universal’ features of translated texts:
simplification, explicitation, normalization and levelling out of awkward features
in the original.2 While productive in terms of setting research agendas, Baker’s
view of translationese focuses on certain cognitive strategies for coping with the
strangeness of the source text, and their linguistic outcomes, not directly on the
general linguistic characteristics of the target text as compared to the source.
Guangrong Dai’s study of hybridity in translated Chinese takes a different
approach to the study of translationese. His corpus analytical framework promises
to capture quantitatively those elements of translationese that qualitatively a reader
might recognize as distinguishing a translated text from a non-translated text. To do
this, he follows a small but influential group of scholars, such as the late Professor
Richard Xiao, who have drawn upon corpus linguistics to study normativity and
deviation in source texts and their translations. Their argument is the simple one
that the source texts exert an influence upon certain features of the translated texts,
vii
viii Foreword
and that influence can be seen in abnormal distributions of certain types of feature
in the translated texts.
To study the influence of the source language on the target language, corpus
Guangrong Dai employs three types of corpora: a corpus of source texts (in this
case, English and Chinese), a parallel corpus of translations of these source texts
into Chinese and English and a comparable corpus of English/Chinese texts,
controlled for genre, that give evidence for normative features in each language.
It will be no surprise to any reader who has decided to consult the present volume
that Guangrong Dai’s research makes substantial claims about the complex rela-
tionship of Chinese translationese both to English and to non-translated Chinese.
That is, texts that have been translated from Chinese to English systematically show
certain lexical, grammatical and discursive choices that are not necessarily
governed by Baker’s ‘translation universals’, though some features no doubt relate
to these universals. Dai’s innovation is to focus on Chinese, a language that,
typologically, shares little with English, having a radically different grammar,
vocabulary and even orthographic system. Even so, linguistically, traces of
‘Englishness’ survive in the translated Chinese texts. Guangrong Dai draws upon
earlier, less systematic accounts of features of Chinese ‘translationese’, or ‘Angli-
cized Chinese,’ and exploits his corpora in a series of detailed case studies to test
whether the translated texts display deviant distributions of these linguistic features,
when compared to ‘non-translated’ texts in similar genres. What he arrives at is a
provisional, empirical profile of those linguistic features that characterize Chinese
texts translated from English. Though in some respects still provisional, this profile
results from the establishment of a sound methodology whose further application
will no doubt strengthen the claims made here. The corpus framework will bear
further fruit.
The research also raises other intriguing issues. The corpora used in the present
analysis largely consist of texts from two different time periods. There is the
provocative suggestion that the non-translated texts in the more recent period are,
in some ways, becoming more like the translated texts from the earlier period. If
this pattern is borne out, Guangrong Dai may well have identified a method for
eliciting quantitative evidence for language change, in this case triggered by greater
contact between English (or perhaps European languages) and Chinese over the
past century. There might be various reasons for such a shift in linguistic norms
over time: greater trade between East and West, the impact of mass education in
English language in China, increased electronic and digital communication, more
exposure to the English language in China or perhaps even the cumulative and
accelerating impact of translation itself. But whatever the cause, and however
different the languages remain, there is some evidence for the reconfiguration of
Chinese linguistic norms under the influence of English.
The research presented in this volume also usefully points towards possibilities
for the further study of linguistic hybridity. As noted, Guangrong Dai largely takes a
case study approach to the analysis of linguistic hybridity in texts translated from
English into Chinese; the features he studies have been suggested by earlier
scholars and cover different linguistic levels. One possible next step would perhaps
Foreword ix
be to stand back from the data in the three types of corpora and consider the
clustering of linguistic features within each corpus. The corpora would be mined
to generate information about significantly different features that are not pre-
identified; effectively they would generate their own points of reference for
comparison.
However, these developments are for another day. The fact that we can now
begin to explore such issues is a testimony to the innovative groundwork laid down
in the present volume, which offers a systematic and fascinating set of insights into
the ways in which Chinese texts translated from English are affected by the
gravitational ‘pull’ of the source language at different linguistic levels.
John Corbett
University of Macau
Notes
1. Interview 02: James McGonigal on “Passage/An Pasaiste”. 2016. In The Scottish

Corpus of Texts & Speech. Glasgow: University of Glasgow. Retrieved April
2016, from http://www.scottishcorpus.ac.uk/document/?documentid=612 See
also James McGonigal (2007) Passage/An Pasaiste. Glasgow: Mariscat Press
2. Baker, M. (1993). Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Implications and
applications. In M. Baker, G.Francis and E. Tognini-Bonelli, eds. Text and
technology: In honour of John Sinclair. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 17–45.
ThiS is a FM Blank Page
Acknowledgements
The present research develops from my doctoral thesis which carried out at
University of Macau (UM), and many people offered me generous help in the
writing of this book. First, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my
supervisor, Professor John Corbett, for his generous help, constant supervision and
helpful academic suggestions. Thanks to him for giving me the opportunity to
develop my own ideas and the time to write them down. His kindness and patience
have always helped me navigate the periods of depression during my studies. He,
not only for his distinguished academic abilities but for his charming personality,
was, is and will be a role model of mine for life. My thanks also go to Professor
Zhang Meifang, for her help and encouragement during my research at UM.
Heartfelt thanks also go to Professor Richard Xiao for introducing me to the
world of corpus linguistics. A considerable part of the research presented here was
inspired by or developed in joint projects with him. I owe him thanks for his
generous assistance and constant encouragement throughout my PhD study. He
left us forever on January 2nd, 2016. May he rest in peace in Heaven.
Thanks to Professor Li Defeng for being my linguistic conscience and a good
friend at the same time. I give thanks for his insistence that I must see the words
behind the numbers. Empirical translation studies with the help of corpora must
take all aspects into considerations without ignoring the reasons which cause the
difference between original and translated languages. I owe special thanks to
Professor Lynne Bowker, University of Ottawa, Canada, and Professor Hu Kaibao,
Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China, for their comments and suggestions on my
thesis.
Thanks to Professor Wang Kefei from National Research Centre for Foreign
Language Education, Beijing Foreign Studies University, for his suggestions for my
research proposal and generous help as a Chief Editor for my book published by
Shanghai Jiaotong University Press in 2013.
Thanks to Professor Zhang Xu, the Dean of the School of Humanities of Fujian
University of Technology. His undeviating support and trust encouraged me all
the time.
xi
xii Acknowledgements
Special thanks to my friends such as Song Yuchun from Shaoguan University

(with the help of whom I designed the parallel corpus software), He Wenzhao
(Oscar) from Jiaxing University and now PhD student at Department of English,
UM, Dr. Huang Libo from Xi’an International Studies University and Dr. Li
Dechao from Hong Kong Polytechnic University who has always helped me with
the reference material. My final acknowledgements go to my family. I would like to
express my love and gratitude to my wife Zuo Shangjun (Miranda) and son Dai
Mingwei (David), for their endless love, courage and support to me.
Contents
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 General Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Specific Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Research Questions and Research Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4 Organization and Significance of the Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2 Hybridity in Translation Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.2 Hybridity in Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3 Occurrence of Hybridity in Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.4 Questions about Hybridity in Translated Languages . . . . . . . . . 16
2.5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3 Hybridity within CTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.2 Convergence between CL and CTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.3 Previous Research on Translated Language in CTS . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3.1 TU Hypotheses and Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3.2 Challenges for TU Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.3.3 CTS: Current Research on English-Chinese
Language Pair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.4 Hybridisation in the Translation Norm Continuum . . . . . . . . . . 29
3.5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4 Hybridity in Anglicised Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
4.2 Background of Anglicisms in Modern Written Chinese . . . . . . . 40
xiii
xiv Contents
4.3 Previous Research on Anglicisms in MWC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

4.3.1 Anglicisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.3.2 Anglicised Chinese in the Eyes of Grammarians . . . . . 41
4.3.3 Anglicised Chinese in the Eyes of Sinologists . . . . . . . 43
4.4 Current Research on Anglicised Chinese with Corpus Data . . . . 45
4.5 Powerful Hybridity: Impact of Anglicisation on Chinese
Language Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
4.6 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5 Corpus Methodology and Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
5.1 Theoretical Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
5.2 Corpora Design for the Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
5.2.1 Parallel Corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
5.2.2 Comparable Corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
5.2.3 Annotation of Corpora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
5.3 Software Used in the Corpus Analysis Framework . . . . . . . . . . 64
5.3.1 Alignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
5.3.2 Xaira . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
5.3.3 WordSmith Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
5.3.4 ParaConc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
5.4 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
6 Native and Translated Chinese: Normality and Hybridity . . . . . . . 71
6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
6.2 Linguistic Norms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
6.3 Normality of Native Chinese Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
6.3.1 Non-inflectional Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
6.3.2 Aspect Language without Grammatical Category
of Tense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
6.3.3 Monosyllabic Myth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
6.3.4 Paratactic Organization Strategy and Depending
on Word Order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
6.3.5 “Verby” Language and Other Developed
Grammatical Norms of Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
6.4 Differences between Native and Translated Chinese . . . . . . . . . 77
6.4.1 Dissyllablic Prevalence in Both Translated
and Native Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
6.4.2 A Comparison of Linguistic Features in Translated
and Native Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
6.5 Hybridity in TC: Framework and Features for Investigation . . . . 85
6.6 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Contents xv
7 Lexical Features of Hybridity in Translated Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . 89

7.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
7.2 Lexical Features of Translated Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
7.3 Word-Formation Features of Translated Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . 93
7.3.1 Suffixes in Translated Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
7.3.2 Morphological Increase in Translated Chinese . . . . . . . 99
7.4 ‘DV Constructions’ in Translated Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
7.4.1 ‘N + DE + V’ Constructions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
7.4.2 ‘N + V’ Constructions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
7.4.3 Reasons for the Prevalence of DV-Constructions
in Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
7.5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
8 Classifier Constructions in Translated Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
8.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
8.2 Categories of Classifier in Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
8.3 Classifier Constructions in Chinese and English . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
8.4 Classifier Constructions in Native and Translated Chinese . . . . 113
8.5 ‘YI GE’ in Native and Translated Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
8.6 ‘YI GE’ in English-Chinese Parallel Corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
8.7 Explanation of the Prevalence of Classifier Constructions
in Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
8.8 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
9 Light Verbs in Translated Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
9.1 Introduction: Light Verbs in English and Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . 133
9.2 Light Verbs in LCMC and ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
9.3 The Light Verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in Translated Chinese and Original
Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
9.3.1 Collocations of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
9.3.2 Collocations of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
9.4 The Light Verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in English-Chinese Parallel Corpora . . . 145
9.4.1 Concordancing of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in Parallel Corpora . . . . . . 145
9.4.2 English Equivalents of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
9.4.3 Methods for Translating ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ into English . . . . . . . 150
9.5 The Light Verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in Diachronic Comparable Corpora . . . . 151
9.6 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
10 Syntactic Hybridity in TC: ‘SHI’ Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
10.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
10.2 ‘SHI’ and Its Structure: Categories and Functions . . . . . . . . . . . 155
10.3 ‘SHI’ in Non-Translated and Translated Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . 158
10.4 ‘SHI’ Collocation Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
xvi Contents
10.5 ‘SHI’ Structure in Parallel Corpora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165

10.5.1 Concordancing Results in the E-C Parallel Corpus . . . . 166
10.5.2 English ‘BE’ and Chinese ‘SHI’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
10.5.3 ‘SHI. . .DE’ Structure in Parallel Corpus . . . . . . . . . . . 169
10.6 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
11 Nominalization and Cohesive Features in TC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
11.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
11.2 Nominalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
11.2.1 Nominalization Methods in Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
11.2.2 Nominalization Markers in Non-translated
and Translated Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
11.3 Cohesive Features in Translated Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
11.3.1 Cohesive Methods in Modern Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
11.3.2 Prepositions and Conjunctions in Non-TC and TC . . . . 184
11.3.3 Cohesive Features in TC: A Case Study of ‘rúguǒ’
(如果) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
11.4 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
12 Conclusions and Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
12.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
12.2 Summary and the Findings of the Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
12.3 Theoretical and Practical Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
12.4 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
12.5 Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
Appendix 1 Books Sampled for MCCC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
Appendix 2 CLAWS 8 Tagset for English . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
Appendix 3 ICTCLAS2008 Part-of-speech Tagset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
List of Figures
Fig. 1.1 Flowchart of this research . . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . 5

Fig. 1.2 Corpora framework for this research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Fig. 2.1 Hybridity in translation .. .. . .. .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . 17
Fig. 3.1 Universals in Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Fig. 3.2 Norms in translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Fig. 3.3 Norm continuum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Fig. 3.4 Overview of possible analysis scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Fig. 3.5 Discovery vs. justification procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Fig. 5.1 Corpora used in this research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Fig. 5.2 Basic construction of GCEPC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Fig. 5.3 Screenshot of alignment . . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . 59
Fig. 5.4 GCEPC-comparable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Fig. 5.5 Sample screenshot of CLAWS POS tagging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Fig. 5.6 ICTCLAS POS tagging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Fig. 5.7 Alignment system .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . 65
Fig. 5.8 Aligned results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
Fig. 5.9 Concordancing results of aspect markers in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Fig. 5.10 Loading corpus files for ParaConc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Fig. 6.1 Word length in LCMC and ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Fig. 6.2 Proportions of different word lengths in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Fig. 6.3 Proportions of different word lengths in ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Fig. 6.4 Framework for describing the hybridity features in TC . . . .. . . . .. . 83
Fig. 7.1 Major function word categories in LCMC and ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Fig. 7.2 Pronouns in Chinese texts and the English source
equivalents . . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. . 91
Fig. 7.3 Chinese modal particles in Babel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Fig. 7.4 Modal particle ‘le’ (了) in Babel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Fig. 7.5 ‘zheng (症)’ in ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
xvii
xviii List of Figures
Fig. 7.6 ‘zheng’ (症) in Babel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

Fig. 7.7 ‘zhi’ (制) in ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Fig. 7.8 ‘zhi’ (制) in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Fig. 7.9 ‘zhi’ (制) in ACADEMIC-TC 1970s–2000s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Fig. 7.10 ‘n’ + ‘ude1’ + ‘v’ in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Fig. 7.11 ‘n’ + ‘ude1’ + ‘v/vn’ in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
Fig. 7.12 ‘N + DE + V’ constructions in Babel . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 102
Fig. 7.13 ‘N + V’ constructions in ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Fig. 7.14 ‘N + V’ constructions in Babel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Fig. 8.1 ‘yi + classifier’ construction in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Fig. 8.2 ‘yi + classifier’ construction in ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Fig. 8.3 ‘numeral / specifier + classifier’ (mq) in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Fig. 8.4 ‘numeral / specifier + classifier’ (mq) in ZCTC . . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . . .. 115
Fig. 8.5 ‘YI GE’ (一个) in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
Fig. 8.6 ‘YI GE’ (一个) in ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
Fig. 8.7 ‘YI GE’ Collocations in ZCTC (left 1, right 0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
Fig. 8.8 ‘YI GE’ Collocations in LCMC (left 1, right 0) . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . 119
Fig. 8.9 The most important noun classes in English .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. 120
Fig. 8.10 ‘a’/ ‘an’ (AT1) in Babel parallel corpus . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . 122
Fig. 8.11 ‘one’ (MC1) in Babel parallel corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
Fig. 8.12 ‘YI GE’ in BABEL parallel corpus .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . 124
Fig. 9.1 ‘vx’ in WordSmith 5.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
Fig. 9.2 ‘vx’ in Xaira . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
Fig. 9.3 Collocates of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ with z-score in Xaira . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
Fig. 9.4 ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ with ‘gerund’ in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
Fig. 9.5 ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ + ‘le’ in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
Fig. 9.6 ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ + ‘a’ (adjective) in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
Fig. 9.7 ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ + ‘b’ (distinguishing words) in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
Fig. 9.8 ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in translated fictional Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
Fig. 9.9 ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in Babel corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
Fig. 10.1 Normalized frequencies of ‘SHI’ in LCMC and ZCTC . . . . . . . . . 159
Fig. 10.2 ‘SHI’ in LCMC and ZCTC . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 159
Fig. 10.3 Collocations of ‘SHI’ structures in ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
Fig. 10.4 Collocations of ‘SHI’ structures in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
Fig. 10.5 SHI + YI GE constructions in ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
Fig. 10.6 ‘SHI + a. + DE’ structures in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
Fig. 10.7 ‘SHI + a. + DE’ structures in ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
Fig. 10.8 ‘SHI’ in Babel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
Fig. 10.9 ‘BE’ in the online BNC .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . 168
Fig. 10.10 ‘is’ in Babel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
Fig. 10.11 ‘SHI. . .DE’ structure in Babel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
Fig. 10.12 ‘is + ADJ/ADJ Phrase’ structure in Babel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
List of Figures xix
Fig. 11.1 classical ‘zhi’ (之) in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178

Fig. 11.2 classical ‘zhi’ (之) in ZCTC . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . 178
Fig. 11.3 ‘NP + zhi + VP’ in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
Fig. 11.4 ‘NP + zhi + VP’ in ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
Fig. 11.5 ‘NP + DE + VP’ in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
Fig. 11.6 ‘NP + DE + VP’ in ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
Fig. 11.7 ‘zhi’ (之) in Babel .. . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . 181
Fig. 11.8 ‘zhe’ (者) in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
Fig. 11.9 ‘zhe’ (者) in ZCTC . . . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . . .. . .. . 182
Fig. 11.10 ‘zhe’ (者) as NOM in Babel . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . .. . 183
Fig. 11.11 ‘rúguǒ’ (如果) in ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
Fig. 11.12 ‘if’ clauses and phrases in BNC (sample) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 188
Fig. 11.13 ‘if’ clause in Babel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
Fig. 11.14 ‘rúguǒ + shuo’ (如果说) in Babel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
Fig. 12.1 Three-phase comparative analysis (TPCA) of Jantunen
(2004) .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. . 198
ThiS is a FM Blank Page
List of Tables
Table 3.1 Comparison between CTS and CL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Table 4.1 Anglicised features in Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Table 5.1 Babel parallel corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Table 5.2 GCEPC-fiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Table 5.3 GCEPC-non-fiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Table 5.4 MECPC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Table 5.5 The genres covered in LCMC and ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Table 5.6 Fiction comparable corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Table 5.7 Nonfiction comparable corpus . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 61
Table 5.8 MCCC-ACADEMIC-TC . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. 62
Table 5.9 MCCC-ACADEMIC-NTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Table 6.1 Basic data about the Babel corpus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Table 6.2 GCEPC-fiction (E-C) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 79
Table 6.3 GCEPC non-fiction (E-C) .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . 79
Table 6.4 GCEPC-FictCom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Table 6.5 GCEPC-NonFictCom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Table 6.6 MCCC-ACADEMIC-TC . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. 80
Table 6.7 MCCC-ACADEMIC-NTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Table 6.8 LCMC vs. ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Table 6.9 Linguistic features in LCMC & ZCTC and statistical data . . . . . 84
Table 7.1 ‘zhi’ (制) in LCMC . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . 97
Table 7.2 ‘zhi’ (制) in ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
Table 7.3 English nouns and Chinese translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Table 7.4 English nouns and Chinese translations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Table 8.1 Types of Classifiers .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . 110
Table 8.2 Classifiers in LCMC and ZCTC . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . 113
Table 8.3 ‘YI GE一个’ collocation in LCMC and ZCTC
(left:0; right:2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
xxi
xxii List of Tables
Table 8.4 ‘YI GE一个’ collocation in LCMC and ZCTC

(left:0; right:1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
Table 8.5 Noncount nouns . . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . 121
Table 8.6 BNC word list . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . 121
Table 8.7 ‘YI GE’ and its English Originals in the Babel Corpus . . . . . . . . . 124
Table 8.8 The noun phrase typology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
Table 9.1 ‘vx’ in LCMC and ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
Table 9.2 Collocations of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
Table 9.3 Collocations of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
Table 9.4 ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in MCCC-ACADEMIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
Table 10.1 ‘SHI’ in LCMC and ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
Table 10.2 ‘SHI’ in non-lit. & lit of LCMC and ZCTC . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . 159
Table 10.3 Collocations of ‘SHI’ structures in LCMC & ZCTC . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
Table 10.4 ‘SHI + Yi GE’ collocations (left0: right5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
Table 10.5 BE in CLAWS TAGSET C8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
Table 10.6 BE and its frequency in BNC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
List of Abbreviations
ANN Artificial Neural Network

BNC British National Corpus
BP back propagation
CL Corpus Linguistics
CLF classifier
CLAWS Constituent Likelihood Automatic Word-tagging System
CLS Contrastive Language Studies
CTS Corpus Translation Studies
DTS Descriptive Translation Studies
DUR durative aspect marker (-zhe, zai)
EXP experiential aspect marker (-guo)
IA Iterative Algorithm
ICTCLAS Institute of Computing Technology, Chinese Lexical Analysis System
LCMC Lancaster Corpus of Mandarin Chinese
MWC modern written Chinese
NOM nominalizing suffix
NTC non-translated Chinese
PFV perfective aspect marker (-le)
PL plural (-men, -xie)
RM reformulation markers
SL source language
ST source text
TC translated Chinese
TEC Translational English Corpus
TL target language
TTR type/token ratio
3sg third person singular pronoun
TS Translation Studies
TT target text
TU Translation Universal
xxiii
xxiv List of Abbreviations
MCCC Macau Comparable Chinese Corpus

MECPC Macau English-Chinese Parallel Corpus
Xaira XML Aware Indexing and Retrieval Architecture
ZCTC ZJU Corpus of Translational Chinese
Chapter 1
Introduction
Abstract This introduction begins with a definition of ‘Hybridity in Translated

Language’, discusses the background of the research briefly, and introduces the
research topic and questions. The methodology and potential contributions are also
presented in this chapter.
Compared to the source texts and target texts, the translated texts present specific
linguistic properties which attract a lot of attention in descriptive translation studies
since the 1990s. The research focuses on hybridity features in translated Chinese,
and our working definition of hybridity in translated language is:
Translated language has a complex hybridity of linguistic properties which combine
characteristics both from the source language and target language. It is the result of
translation processes, including positive authorial and translatorial decisions. Hybridity is
difficult to avoid in the translation process and it can appear at all linguistic levels.
Hybridity features can be divided into two types, one interlingual, the other intralingual.
Stigmatised examples of linguistic hybridity are sometimes referred to

(usually pejoratively) as ‘translationese’. In the present work, the term ‘trans-
lationese’ will be avoided, as the focus of our attention will be those examples of
linguistic hybridity (whether stigmatized or not) that set translated language apart
from non-translated language. The nature of translated language will be further
discussed in the following section.
1.1 General Background
It is common, when reading translated texts (translation products), to feel that “they
are written in their own peculiar style” (Baroni and Bernardini 2006, p. 259).
Indeed, translated language has been regarded as a “non-standard version of the
target language” (Hopkinson 2007, p. 13) owing to the influence of the source
language and the target native language on each other. Translated language com-
bines the characteristics of the source and target languages, and so it presents a set
of hybrid features. Textual studies that compare translated texts with non-translated
texts in the target language show that translated language is a type of hybrid and
© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016 1

G. Dai, Hybridity in Translated Chinese, New Frontiers in Translation Studies,
DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-0742-2_1
2 1 Introduction
mediated discourse that has distinctive features that make it perceptibly different
from the comparable target language.
Many translation scholars regard translated language as a separate ‘dialect’
within a language. As Steiner (2008b, p. 234) points out, “there is a small
but significant tradition of work on assumed properties of translations as text, and
more recently as text-type, or register”. The following section offers a short survey
of these works.
Duff (1981, p. 1) points out that “translation is always second-best, but second-
best does not necessarily imply second-rate”. Duff considers a translated text to be a
hybrid one which often represents “a mixture of styles and languages”, or a
“patchwork” made up of SL (source language) and TL (target language) elements.
He labels translated language a “third language” that lies between the source
language and the target language (ibid. 13).
The notion of translation as a “third language” is echoed by Frawley (1984/
2000) who also argues that translation “is essentially a third code which arises out
of the bilateral consideration of the matrix and target codes: it is, in a sense, a
sub-code of each of the codes involved” (Frawley 1984/2000, p. 168).
Gellerstam considers translated language as “translationese” (Gellerstam 1986)
which is characterized by hybridity and distortions from source and target lan-
guages, and argues that the potential for distortion is immense in translation. The
distortion that comes from the source language, so Neubert and Shreve (1992)
argues, “can not be avoided” for the reason that:
A source text is embedded in a complex linguistic, textual, and cultural context. Its
meaning, communicative intent, and interpretive effect draw upon its natural relationships
in that environment. It is a daunting task to pull a text from its natural surroundings and
recreate it in an alien linguistic and cultural setting. The text belongs to a dynamic cultural
and linguistic ecology. The translator uproots it in a valiant attempt to transplant its fragile
meaning (Neubert and Shreve 1992, p. 2).
Also, the norms of the target language can also cause distortion in translated
language, and the translator will adapt to the target language and culture norms in
the translation processes.
These competing influences from source and target languages give translated
language the characteristics of “unnaturalness and necessity, loss and gain, destruc-
tion and harmony, integration and difference” (Neubert and Shreve 1992, p. 7).
How to describe objectively the outcome of these competing influences
in translated language is one focus of Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS).
The digital corpora and the tools of Corpus Linguistics (CL) make it possible to
describe the characteristics of translated language in new and detailed ways.
1.2 Specific Background 3
1.2 Specific Background
Translation products created by the translators become historical texts which can
offer considerable information for our research. As Hassan says, “history is written
in invisible ink, legible only to needy retrospection” (Hassan 2002, p. 291). The
beginning of the 1990s saw the beginning of much textual-oriented and linguistics-
based translation studies which paid attention to the specific properties of translated
texts with the help of electronic corpora. According to these studies, translations
constitute a ‘text-type’, or ‘register’ of their own (cf. Baker 1993, 1996; Hansen
2003; Hansen-Schirra, Neumann, and Steiner 2012; House 2008; Steiner 2001,
2002, 2004, 2005, 2008a, b; Teich 2001, 2003).
Corpus Linguistics (CL) and related technologies have developed tremendously
quickly since the 1990s, and the integration between Corpus Linguistics and other
disciplines has accelerated the birth of new paradigms in different fields, such as
Contrastive Language Studies (CLS) and Translation Studies (TS). The develop-
ment of corpora, especially translation corpora, has brought renewed vigor into
Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS). Johansson (2007) points out, “we can
observe patterns in language which we were unaware of before or only vaguely
glimpsed” with the help of corpora (Johansson 2007, p.1).
Mona Baker’s Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies: Implications and
Applications (Baker 1993) marked the beginning of Corpus Translation Studies
(CTS). As Laviosa comments, from that point on, Corpus Linguistics “would
provide the methodology for carrying out empirical investigations while translation
theory would identify the areas of enquiry and elaborate operational hypotheses”
(Laviosa 2004, p. 6).
CTS has been concerned with describing translation as a product. With the help
of corpora, Baker found that the language of translation “reflects constraints which
operate in the context of production and reception” (Baker 1999, p. 285), and these
constraints include social, cultural, ideological, and cognitive ones. Baker put
forward a set of Translation Universal (TU) hypotheses and supposed that all
translations are likely to present certain language features just because they are
translations. Teich also pointed out that translation is a specific kind of text that is
different from the original source language text, and at the same time, it is also
different from the comparable original text in the target language (Teich 2001,
p. 199).
Several TU hypotheses have been discussed in translation studies since the
1990s, such as explicitation, sanitization, simplification, under representation,
normalization, levelling out (or convergence) and the “source language shining
through” (more detail is given in Sect. 3.3.1).
It should be pointed out that most of the research concerned with TUs has been
confined mostly to translated English whose source languages are closely related
European languages (Mauranen and Kujamäki 2004, pp. 3–5). The corpora used
most frequently in exploring TU hypotheses are monolingual comparable corpora.
Research on genetically distant language pairs, such as Chinese and Japanese,
4 1 Introduction
Chinese and English, offer new evidence for translated languages studies (cf. Xiao
and Dai 2014).
The previous research on CTS has shed light on the need for further investigation
of translated language with respect to genetically distant pairs. The present research
focuses on Chinese translated from English with the help of comparable and
parallel corpora, and investigates the hybridity features in translated Chinese.
Puurtinen (2003) argues that corpus-based research within translation studies is
just taking its first steps, and discusses some fundamental ideas and concepts
underlying descriptive, corpus-based translation studies. The methodologically
empirical studies were based on a “somewhat larger quantity of data, sampled
with some technique aiming at representativeness, and using categories of data
which allow a transparent relationship to research questions formulated, and also
repeatability of the analysis by different researchers at different places and times”
(Hansen-Schirra, et al. 2012, p. 3).
1.3 Research Questions and Research Methodology
The aim of the present research is to describe a range of hybridity features in

translated Chinese objectively, systematically and scientifically.
The present research hypothesizes that translated Chinese is different from the
source language (English in this research) and the non-translated target language
(i.e., the native Chinese), and that many of the differences can be explained in terms
of hybridity. The research attends to the following questions:
1. What are the linguistic features of hybridity in translated Chinese?
2. Are there any common features of hybridity in different genres of translated
Chinese?
3. How do the patterns of hybridisation compare across the diachronic corpora?
These questions can be tackled with the help of a corpus analysis framework
which includes different corpora in the present research, i.e. comparable and
parallel corpora, diachronic and synchronic corpora, general and specialized cor-
pora. All the corpora are introduced briefly in the following section (Sect. 1.4).
The present research will explore the potential implications of the linguistic
hybridity features in translated Chinese for understanding the norms and nature of
translations.
In order to answer the questions listed in the above section, this research adopts
the following research flowchart (see Fig. 1.1; cf. the procedures outlined in Li and
Zhang (2010)).
Large comparable and parallel corpora are fundamental tools for investigating
the features of the translated Chinese.
In the present research, a parallel corpus is “one which is composed of source
texts and their translations in one or more different languages” (McEnery, Xiao, and
Tono 2006, p. 47). Parallel corpora can be helpful for exploring how an idea in one
1.3 Research Questions and Research Methodology 5
Fig. 1.1 Flowchart of this

research
Hybridity in Translated Chinese
Research topic
Corpora
(Self-building: sampling, annotating, etc.;)
&
(Corpora collecting: size/feature/advantage/etc. )
Corpora data with software (WordSmith, AntConc,

Xaira, ParaConc, Collocate, etc.)
Statistical analyses and data reports

(Loglikelihood, Chi-square, MI-value, Z-score,
etc. )
Examples extraction from corpora; Make sense of

the results; Expectations and Conclusions
language might be conveyed in another language, and they can offer some indirect
evidence to the study of translation processes. Parallel corpora can help to “identify
terminological equivalents in another language” (Bowker and Pearson 2002,
p. 107), offer abundant and authentic translation examples, and all the instances
can be used as fundamental ingredients for Contrastive Studies and Translation
Studies.
A monolingual comparable corpus in the present research is of the type advo-
cated by Baker (1993, 1995) and Laviosa (1998a, b), namely, one which contains
comparable original and translated texts in the same language. Comparable corpora
are useful for the translator’s understanding of the texts, and they also can improve
the quality of translation in terms of fluency, correct term choice and idiomatic
6 1 Introduction
Chinese Translated Mo
no
-lin
s gu
pu al
Cor Co
mp
llel ara
Para ble
C orp
us
English Original Bilingual Comparable Corpus Chinese Original
Fig. 1.2 Corpora framework for this research
expressions in the chosen field. Comparable corpora are helpful for the researchers
to investigate the features of the translated languages.
The present research also adopts general and specialized corpora, diachronic and
synchronic corpora. A general corpus consists of texts of varied types, and it may
include written or spoken language, or both, and may include texts produced in one
country or many. It may be used to produce reference materials for language
learning or translation, and it is often used as a “baseline in comparison with
more specialized corpora” (Hunston 2002, p. 14). A well-known general corpus is
the British National Corpus (BNC), while a specialized corpus tends to “be domain
or genre specific” (e.g. newspaper texts or academic prose) and “is designed to
represent a sub-language” (McEnery, Xiao, and Tono 2006, p. 60).
A diachronic corpus contains texts from the same language gathered from
different time periods and can be used to trace changes in language evolution,
while a “synchronic corpus contains texts from a particular time period and seeks to
provide a snapshot of language usage” (Anderson and Corbett 2009, p. 7).
The triangle of corpora framework for this research is illustrated in Fig. 1.2. It
consists of translated Chinese texts, English original texts and non-translated
Chinese texts. A detailed description of the framework is offered in Chap. 5.
Corpus data can be retrieved automatically with software, such as WordSmith,
AntConc, Xaira, ParaConc, Collocate etc.
1.4 Organization and Significance of the Research
The book consists of 12 chapters.

Chapter 1 introduces the background for the research, and puts forward the
research questions, goals and objectives. It also introduces the methodology and
design of the research, and the potential contributions are also included here.
Chapter 2 reviews the previous research on hybridity in translation and discusses
the reasons why hybridity in translation can be the focus of Translation Studies and
what features of hybridity are evident in translations. Unanswered questions about
hybridity in translated languages are also presented in this chapter.
1.4 Organization and Significance of the Research 7
Chapter 3 discusses Corpus Translation Studies as a new approach to investi-

gating the hybridity features of translated language. CTS can shed new light on the
studies of translated language. Some features and hypotheses regarding translated
texts are discussed and new trends in CTS are also included at the end of this
chapter. It also explores the hybridisation in the translation norm continuum, and
the norm continuum of translation properties can show the tendencies of hybrid
features which can be located anywhere between the typical patterns of the SL and
those of the TL.
Chapter 4 reviews the hybridity features in Chinese from the perspective of
Anglicisation. Anglicisation may be the result of translation from English to
Chinese. Modern written Chinese exhibits the impact of English. This chapter
surveys aspects of the influence of language contact between English and Chinese
since the May Fourth Movement in 1919, and also the Anglicised Chinese features
as revealed in diachronic and comparable non-translated Chinese texts.
Chapter 5 introduces the methodology and design of the present research. It
explores the theoretical considerations for the research and offers a list of the
corpora and software used in the research. Software for building parallel corpora
which was designed by myself and a fellow student is introduced in the chapter. It
also introduces the software for retrieving data from the different corpora: mono-
lingual comparable corpora and bilingual parallel corpora.
Chapter 6 introduces a set of linguistic norms of native Chinese, and these norms
can help us differentiate translated Chinese from non-translated Chinese. The
difference between non-translated and translated Chinese is illustrated in the
chapter. It also offers a brief description of the framework structure for exploring
the hybridity characteristics of translated Chinese. The hybridity feature list for the
research is also included in the chapter and this list will be investigated in detail in
the following chapters.
The following chapters carry out the data-retrieving, data-analysis and investi-
gation of hybridity features in translated Chinese within the analytical framework.
These chapters present some technological means of identifying hybridity at dif-
ferent linguistic levels in translated Chinese texts and in offering the results of
statistical analyses. Explanations for the hybridity features will be offered in these
chapters. Most of the features in translated Chinese are discussed in detail here for
the first time.
Chapter 7 investigates the lexical features of hybridity in translated Chinese,
focusing on the morphological increase in translated Chinese, with some suffixes as
case studies. The chapter pays close attention to the ‘DV’ constructions and
investigates two classes of the constructions (N + DE + V, N + V). The reasons for
the prevalence of DV constructions in Chinese are also discussed.
Chapter 8 explores classifier constructions with the help of comparable and
parallel corpora. It briefly introduces the categories of classifier in Chinese, and
then discusses the differences between English and Chinese classifier constructions.
The concordancing results in native and translated Chinese are explored in detail,
with ‘YI + Classifier’ construction as a case study. It also offers the explanations for
prevalence of the classifier constructions in Chinese.
8 1 Introduction
Chapter 9 analyses the hybridity features of light verb constructions in translated

Chinese. It demonstrates that the frequency of light verbs in translated Chinese is
much higher than that of non-translated Chinese. The chapter focuses on the light
verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ (进行proceed) and analyses its collocations in the comparable corpus
with the help of Xaira. The chronological development of the light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’
(进行) is analysed in relation to diachronic comparable corpora. The chapter also
offers the translator ways of translating the light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’(进行) into English.
Chapter 10 carries out a detailed investigation of the syntactic hybridity char-
acteristics of ‘SHI’ (是) sentence structures in translated Chinese. It introduces the
categories and functions of the structure in Chinese, and concordances the structure
in a Chinese comparable corpus. It explores the collocations of ‘SHI’ in translated
and native Chinese with the help of software and statistical testing methods. The
‘SHI’ structure in English-Chinese parallel corpus is also investigated, and com-
pared with the English equivalent ‘BE’. The prevalence of ‘BE’ in English sources
exerts influence on translated Chinese with an abnormally prevalent use of ‘SHI’
structure in translations. The ‘SHI. . .DE’ construction is also explored in the
chapter. The discussions identify the hybridity features of ‘SHI’ in translated
Chinese.
Chapter 11 analyses another two hybridity features in translated Chinese, i.e.,
nominalization and cohesive features. It investigates the main methods of nominal-
ization, namely adding ‘de’(的), ‘zhi’(之) and ‘zhe’(者), and also discusses some
nominalization structures in translated Chinese. The translated Chinese also
demonstrates some hybridity features of cohesion with the influence of English.
The prepositions and conjunctions are used in translated Chinese with higher fre-
quencies than thay are in native Chinese, and the cohesive methods also present
some hybrid features.
The last chapter, Chap. 12 presents the conclusions and expectations of the
present research. It summarizes the findings, theoretical and practical implications
of the whole project, and points out the limitations which should be dealt with in
future studies. It also explores the direction of future corpus translation studies, and
expectations for translated language studies are also included in the end of the
chapter.
The appendices offer the list of texts used for the Chinese academic comparable
corpora which includes translated Chinese books and non-translated Chinese books.
The CLAWS 8 tagsets for English and ICTCLAS 2008 part-of-speech tagset for
Chinese, which can help readers to understand the annotation tags in the book,
are also included in the appendices.
The present study compares non-translated Chinese (or native Chinese) and
translated Chinese systematically to investigate the features of hybridity in trans-
lated Chinese. It adopts a corpus analysis framework which draws on the resources
of comparable and parallel corpora, diachronic and synchronic corpora, general and
specific corpora, and it will shed new light on the largely English-based TU
hypotheses.
English and Chinese are two world languages that differ genetically. Compared
with typologically related languages, the cross linguistic contrast of English and
References 9
Chinese is more challenging and can offer new insights in Translation Studies. The
distinctive hybrid features of translated language investigated in the research can
help us understand the differences between English and Chinese, deepen the
knowledge of Chinese on the one hand, and recognise the language changes and
translation induced variations on the other hand.
The detailed exploration of translated language can also help us understand the
translation process and identify translation norms. As the outcomes of a norm-
governed activity, translation products can tell us more than we expected. The
findings in the research can help translators become generally more informed about
what goes on when they are translating, and this will shed new light on Translation
Studies and Contrastive Language Studies, and also on translator training and
translation teaching.
References
Anderson, W., and J. Corbett. 2009. Teaching English as a friendly language: Lessons from the
SCOTS corpus. English Language Teaching Journal (ELT Journal) 64(4): 414–423.
Baker, M. 1993. Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Implications and applications. In Text and
technology: In honour of John Sinclair, ed. M. Baker, G. Francis, and E. Tognini-Bonelli,
233–250. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Baker, M. 1995. Corpora in translation studies: An overview and some suggestions for
future research. Target 7(2): 223–243.
Baker, M. 1996. Corpus-based translation studies: The challenges that lie ahead. In Terminology,
LSP and translation: Studies in language engineering in Honour of Juan C. Sager,
ed. H. Somers, 175–187. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Baker, M. 1999. The role of corpora in investigating the linguistic behaviour of professional trans-
lators. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 4(2): 281–298.
Baroni, M., and S. Bernardini. 2006. A new approach to the study of translationese: Machine-
learning the difference between original and translated text. Literary and Linguistic Computing
21(3): 259–274.
Bowker, L., and J. Pearson. 2002. Working with specialized language: A practical guide to
using corpora. London/New York: Routledge.
Duff, A. 1981. The third language: Recurrent problems of translation into English. Oxford:
Pergamon Press.
Frawley, W. 1984/2000. Prolegomenon to a theory of translation. In The translation studies reader,
ed. L. Venuti, 250–263. London/New York: Routledge.
Gellerstam, M. 1986. Translationese in Swedish novels translated from English. In Translation studies
in Scandinavia, ed. L.W.H. Lindquist, 88–95. Lund: CWK Gleerup.
Hansen, S. (2003). The nature of translated text: An interdisciplinary methodology for the
investigation of the specific properties of translations (Doctoral Thesis). Saarbr€ ucken:
DFKI & Saarland University.
Hansen-Schirra, S., S. Neumann, and E. Steiner (eds.). 2012. Cross-linguistic corpora for the study
of translations: Insights from the language pair English-German. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Hassan, I. 2002. The Australian spiritual journey. In The best Australian essays 2002,
ed. P. Craven, 287–299. Melbourne: Black Inc.
Hopkinson, C. 2007. Factors in linguistic interference: A case of study in translation.
SKASE Journal of Translation and Interpretation 2(1): 13–23.
House, J. 2008. Beyond intervention: Universals in translation. Trans-kom 1(1): 6–19.
10 1 Introduction
Hunston, S. 2002. Corpora in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Johansson, S. 2007. Seeing through multilingual corpora: On the use of corpora in
contrastive studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Laviosa, S. 1998a. Core patterns of lexical use in a comparable corpus of English narrative prose.
Meta: Translators’ Journal 43(4): 557–570.
Laviosa, S. 1998b. The corpus-based approach: A new paradigm in translation studies.
Laviosa, S. 2004. Corpus-based translation studies: Where does it come from? Where is it going?
Language Matters 35(1): 6–27.
Li, D., and C. Zhang. 2010. Sense-making in corpus-assisted translation research: A review of
corpus-assisted translation research in China. In Using corpora in contrastive and translation
studies, ed. R. Xiao, 235–254. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Mauranen, A., and P. Kujamäki (eds.). 2004. Translation Universals: Do they exist? Amsterdam/
Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
McEnery, T., R. Xiao, and Y. Tono. 2006. Corpus-based language studies: An advanced resource
book. London/New York: Routledge.
Neubert, A., and G.M. Shreve. 1992. Translation as text. Kent: The Kent State Univeristy Press.
Puurtinen, T. 2003. Genre-specific features of translationese? Linguistic differences between
translated and non-translated Finnish children’s literature. Literary and Linguistic Computing
18(4): 389–406.
Steiner, E. 2001. Translations English-German: Investigating the relative importance of
systemic contrasts and of the text type ‘translation’. SPRIK reports 7: 1–49.
Steiner, E. 2002. Grammatical metaphor in translation. In Information structure in a cross-
linguistic perspective, ed. H. Hasselgård, S. Johansson, B. Behrens, and C. Fabricius-Hansen,
213–228. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Steiner, E. 2004. Translated texts: Properties, variants and evaluations. Frankfurt am Main:
Peter Lang GmbH.
Steiner, E. 2005. Explicitation, its lexicogrammatical realization, and its determining (independent)
variables – Towards an empirical and corpus-based methodology. SPRIK reports 36: 1–43.
Steiner, E. 2008a. Empirical studies of translations as a mode of language contact—“explicitness”
of lexicogrammatical encoding as a relevant dimension. In Language contact and contact
languages, ed. P. Siemund and N. Kintana, 317–346. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Pub. Co.
Steiner, E. 2008b. Explicitation: Towards an empirical and corpus-based methodology. In Meaning in
context: Strategies for implementing intelligent applications of language studies, ed. J.J. Webster,
234–277. London/New York: Continuum.
Teich, E. 2001. Towards a model for the description of cross-linguistic divergence and common-
ality in translation. In Exploring translation and multilingual text production: Beyond content,
ed. E. Steiner and C. Yallop, 191–227. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Teich, E. 2003. Cross-linguistic variation in system and text: A methodology for the investigation of
translations and comparable texts. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Xiao, R., and G. Dai. 2014. Lexical and grammatical properties of Translational Chinese: Trans-
lation universal hypotheses reevaluated from the Chinese perspective. Corpus Linguistics and
Linguistic Theory 10(1): 11–55.
Chapter 2
Hybridity in Translation Studies
Abstract This chapter first introduces the term ‘hybridity’ briefly from etymology
and its use in some fields, such as natural sciences, social science, etc. Bhabha
(1994) discusses “hybridity” from the cultural perspective and puts forward the
concept of “in-between space”(Bhabha HK, The location of culture. Routledge,
London/New York, 1994). Levý (1963) investigates hybridity in translated texts for
the first time. It also reviews some research on hybridity in translation studies,
discusses the reasons why hybridity in translation can be occurred, and puts forward
some unanswered questions about hybridity in translated languages.
2.1 Introduction
When the source language influences the translated language, the phenomenon
has been described as the “SL shining through” (Teich 2003, p. 145); that is, the
translation “may be oriented more towards the source language” (ibid.) than an
otherwise comparable non-translated text in the target language would be. The
target language also constraints the translated language with “TL normalization”
(Teich 2003, p. 145). In brief, the translated language is a mixture of influences
from source language and target language, and it demonstrates hybridity charac-
teristics at all linguistic levels, that is, lexical, syntactic and discursive ones.
Hybridity is a topic attracted lot of attention in different fields. Etymologically,
the term derives from Latin. And in Online Etymology Dictionary (http://www.
etymonline.com), ‘hybrid’ comes from Latin ‘hybrida’, variant of ‘ibrida’ (mon-
grel), specifically ‘offspring of a tame sow and a wild boar’, of unknown origin but
probably from Greek and somehow related to ‘hubris’. And according to Encyclo-
pedia Britannica (http://www.britannica.com), ‘hybrid’ means ‘offspring of parents
that differ in genetically determined traits. The parents may be of different species,
genera, or (rarely) families. The term hybrid, therefore, has a wider application than
the terms mongrel or crossbreed, which usually refer to animals or plants resulting
from a cross between two races, breeds, strains, or varieties of the same species
(Schäffner and Adab 2001b, p. 168). The term ‘hybrid’ also appears in
different fields, such as electronics (hybrid transformator, hybrid integrated circuit,

DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-0742-2_2
12 2 Hybridity in Translation Studies
hybrid circuit), chemistry (hybrid complex, hybrid rock), mechanics (hybrid vehi-
cle, hybrid watch), and social sciences (cf. Han 2005). In linguistics and discourse
analysis, the notion of hybridity has been used to describe genres and text types
(Schäffner and Adab 2001b, p. 168). Linguistics adopts this term to describe the
language phenomena such as “in morphology a compound or derived word whose
single elements come from different languages, e.g. bureau + cracy (French,
Greek) > bureaucracy; tele- + vision (Greek, Latin) > television; re- + work
(Latin, English) > rework” (Bussmann 1998, p. 523) or “hybrid language” as
“developed principally in the European colonies during the height of European
colonization” (ibid.: 906). Bhabha (1994) discusses “hybridity” from the cultural
perspective. Bhabha’s notion of hybridity is influenced by the “hybrid construction”
and “heteroglossia” put forward by Bakhtin (1981). Bakhtin’s ‘hybrid construction’
can be divided into “social dialects, characteristic group behaviour, professional
jargons, generic languages, languages of generations and age groups, tendentious
languages, languages of the authorities, of various circles and of passing fashions,
languages that serve the specific sociopolitical purposes of the day, even of the
hour” (ibid.: 262–63). While “heteroglossia” manifests itself in the “hybrid con-
struction” of an utterance that “belongs, by its grammatical (syntactic) and compo-
sitional markers, to a single speaker, but that actually contains mixed within it
two utterances, two speech manners, two styles, two ‘languages’, two semantic and
axiological belief systems” (ibid.: 304).
Bhabha combines the notion of “hybrid construction” into postcolonialism, and
puts forward the concept of “in-between space” to “locate the question of culture in
the realm of the beyond”:
These ‘in-between’ spaces provide the terrain for elaborating strategies of selfhood—
singular or communal—that initiative new signs of identity, and innovative sites of
collaboration, and contestation, in the act of defining the idea of society itself. It is in the
emergence of the interstices—the overlap and displacement of domains of difference—that
the intersubjective and collective experiences of nationness, community interest, or
cultural value are negotiated (Bhabha 1994, pp. 1–2)
This interstitial passage between fixed identifications opens up the possibility of

a cultural hybridity that entertains difference, and “the production of meaning
requires that these two places be mobilized in the passage through a Third Space”
(ibid.: 36).
The Third Space can be realized by hybridisation. Just as Robinson (1997)
points out that hybridisation can be used to describe “the process by which races,
ethnic groups, cultures and languages are mixed together” (Robinson 1997, p. 118)
in translation process. In the long history of transaltion, translations are crossing
boundaries activities, experiencing the drifting of difference, locally, temporally,
socially and culturally. As a kind of intercultural communication activities, trans-
lation performs an important role in the Third Space in which new text types and
new genres could be produced (Tirkkonen-Condit 2001, p. 261).
It has also attracted attention from Translation Studies. The upcoming section
reviews previous research on hybridity in translation.
2.2 Hybridity in Translation 13
2.2 Hybridity in Translation
According to Zauberga, Jiřı́ Levý was the first to investigate hybridity in translated
texts. In Levý’s opinion, the translation process disrupts the form-content unity of
the source text and some pressure is inevitably exerted upon the target language.
Consequently, a translated text can easily be recognised by words, word combi-
nations, structures that are semantically and grammatically correct but seem some-
how artificial (Zauberga 2001, p. 265, citing Levý, 1963).
Levý’s The Art of Translation was first published in Czech in 1963, and a new
English version was republished in 2011 translated by Patrick Corness (Levý 2011).
In Levý’s understanding,
. . .a translated work is a composite, hybrid configuration. It is not a monolithic work but an
interpermeation, a conglomerate of two structures. On the one hand there is the semantic
content and the formal characteristics of the source; on the other hand there is the entire
system of artistic features specific to the target language, contributed by the translator.
There is some tension between the two mutually interwoven layers, or rather attributes,
which are integral components of the translated work as a whole, and this may manifest
itself in contradictions between them (Levý 2011, p. 67).
Translations, thanks their hybrid configuration, have “the likelihood of causing

changes in the receiving system”, and this hybridity also causes translations to
“tend to deviate from its sanctioned patterns”. The tendency to deviate often
“renders translations quite distinct from non-translated texts, and not necessarily
as a mere production mishap” (Toury 1995, p. 28). So the translated texts can never
be entirely adequate to the original version because the target cultural norms cause
shifts from the source text structures (ibid). In Hermans’ words, “[t]ranslation is
irreducible: it always leaves loose ends, is always hybrid, plural, and different”
(Hermans 1996, p. 45).
Although they recognized the importance of hybridity in characterizing trans-
lated texts, these and the following researchers only went so far as to define and give
a general description of hybridity in translation; they did not have the tools that
would allow them to give a detailed description of the characteristics of hybridity in
translated texts.
According to Hatim and Mason (1997), “Hybrid texts are by definition dynamic
and marked” (Hatim and Mason 1997, p. 185). The definition is so abstract
that we cannot use it to describe the specific features of hybrid texts. In 2001,
Schäffner & Adab defined a hybrid text as:
“a text that results from a translation process. It shows features that somehow seem ‘out of
place’/‘strange’/‘unusual’ for the receiving culture, i.e. the target culture. These features,
however, are not the result of a lack of translational competence or examples of
‘translationese’, but they are evidence of conscious and deliberate decisions by the
translator”(Schäffner and Adab 2001b, p. 176).
This definition identifies some characteristics of hybridity in translations and

can help us to investigate the features of hybridity in detail.
Chan, (2010) explores the hybridity in translated novels and discusses some
types of hybridity. In reading translated novels, “readers find themselves at borders,
boundaries and margins, contending with a language that has a dual allegiance—to
both the source and target languages” (Chan 2010, p. 5). In Chan’s view,
hybrid features in translated novels are:
the result of linguistic non-correspondence, when concepts do not make the successful
passage from one language to another. At the lexical level, this is evidenced by a lack of
match between words in the original with those in the target language. Such mismatching,
however, takes place at all levels of the language, including those of syntax and style. The
result is an interlanguage that incorporates features from two languages, a mixed form
much maligned by the language purists. Cultural incommensurability also accounts for the
fact that certain culture-specific references do not ‘cross over’ in translation (Chan 2010,
p. 9).
Chan, (2010) divides hybridity into three kinds in translation:

(a) Linguistic hybridity, which includes phenomena such as heteroglossia, creoli-
zation and code-switching. The alleged Europeanization of the Chinese lan-
guage in the course of the twentieth century is one instance of linguistic
hybridisation (ibid. p. 43).
(b) Cultural hybridity is seen in the way a translated text incorporates elements of
both source and target cultures. Located at the interface between two cultures,
translations become the site where elements derived from disparate cultural
origins intersect.
(c) Generic hybridity. The generic hybridity is the result of the mixing of
discourse types. In poetry translation, for instance, conventions from the
target text (regarding stanza form, rhyming, metrical patterns, etc.) are often
superimposed on the source text (Chan 2010, p. 43). The generic hybridity is
equal to the text-type hybridisation of Hatim (1997), Hatim and Mason (1997).
The hybridisation of text types is a result of the dynamic nature of text-
typological conventions (Hatim and Mason 1997, p. 185), and “texts are
essentially multifunctional, normally displaying features of more than
one type, and constantly shifting from one typological focus to another”
(Hatim 1997, p. 42). Klinger (2015) discusses translation and linguistic hybrid-
ity from narratology, cognitive poetics, stylistics and film studies.
All the previous research throws light on the definition and classification of
hybridity in translated languages.
2.3 Occurrence of Hybridity in Translation
Different contextual situations lead to different types of hybridity in translation

processes.
Newmark (1988, p. 123) introduces some linguistic situations which cause the
varieties of interference from source language to translation, such as (a) “the
2.3 Occurrence of Hybridity in Translation 15
collocations or lexemes with similar form in SL and TL, but different meanings”;
(b) “as above, but with the same meaning, and therefore to be translated ‘straight’”,
(c) “SL syntactic structures inappropriately superimposed on TL”, and (d) “SL
word order [. . .] inappropriately reproduced”. All these situations cause some
hybridity features to be present in the translated language. For example, Kranich,
House, and Becher (2012)’s research finds out that English-German translations in
the field of popular science tend to allow more and more imports of conventions and
norms from the English source texts, and the translated German is the hybridised
product with the interference of the source language (Kranich, House, and Becher
2012, p. 320).
The features of hybridity caused by the source language ‘shining through’ are
also evident in translated Chinese. Europeanized Chinese is the hybrid product of
translations from European languages, especially English (see Chap. 4 for the
review of Anglicised Chinese). The source languages influence the translated
Chinese at different linguistic levels, such as phonetic (transliteration), morpho-
logical (proliferation of affix-like morphemes), syntactic, etc. (Dai 2013).
Besides the source language influence on translation, there are other types of
interference which can cause hybridity features to appeared.
Newmark (1988) for example discusses “interference from [a] third language
known to the translator”, and “the primary meaning of word interfering with
appropriate contextual meaning” (ibid). As a translator, Newmark points out that
the “stylistic predilections of translator”, and “the translator’s idiolect, including his
regional and social dialect” can result in specific features being present in trans-
lations (Newmark 1988, p. 123).
Berman (1985/2000) investigates the system of textual “deformation” in trans-
lated texts and offers a list of tendencies, namely: rationalization, clarification,
expansion, ennoblement and popularization, qualitative impoverishment, quanti-
tative impoverishment, destruction of rhythms and underlying networks of signifi-
cation, destruction of linguistic patterns, vernacular networks, and expressions /
idioms, and the effacement of the superimposition of languages (Berman, 1985/
2000, p. 288). He realizes that the analysis of textual deformations is “provisional”.
All the tendencies are based on his professional experience as a translator with the
help of examples from the translations of classic novels. In order to analyse the
deformations in translation systematically, Berman argues that it “requires the input
of translators from other domains, [. . .] as well as linguists, ‘poeticians’ and . . .
psychoanalysts” (p. 286).
Besides the interference from the source language and the influence of the target
native language, there are other reasons which lead to the occurrence of features of
hybridity in translated language.
Venuti (1998) argues that hybridity is a consequence of translation in colonial
and postcolonial situations. In subordinate cultures, “perhaps the most consequen-
tial changes wrought by translation occur with the importation of new concepts and
paradigms, especially those that have set going the transition from ancient tradi-
tions, whether oral or literary, to modern notions of time and space, of self and
nation” (Venuti 1998, p. 178). The changes mentioned in Venuti’s (1998) research
are illustrated by the situations in which Europeanized Chinese (see Chap. 4)

became evident in the early stages of twentieth century in China.
Translation-induced features of hybridity can happen in different situations.
According to the investigation of Schäffner & Adab, hybrid texts, as outcomes of
translation, could be produced in the following situations (Schäffner and Adab
2001a; Adab 2005):
1. If the communicative environments are different between source and target
culture, and no established genre in the target culture corresponds to the genre
in the source culture, translation can result in the emergence of new text types
and genres which look unfamiliar and strange to the TT receivers in the target
culture. Hybrids reflect specific textual features (vocabulary, syntax, style, etc.)
which may clash with target language conventions.
We can see this new genre and text type in the following translation situation: the
sonnet did not exist in Chinese culture and language, until translations from
English brought the new genre to the Chinese language and culture. It is a case of
generic hybridity in translation. On the one hand, the sonnet can be hybridised
into Chinese poems with strict rhymes; and on the other hand, the hybrid sonnet
in Chinese can express similar sentiments to classic Chinese poems (Wang 1997,
p. 214).
2. The second situation for the occurrence of hybrid texts is the field of
literary translation. As Venuti (1995) has pointed out, the history of translation
is the history of literary innovation. One possible innovation is a foreignisation
strategy by, which translated texts “seek to recognise the linguistic and
cultural difference of foreign texts” (Venuti, 1995, p. 41).
3. Hybrid texts might result when translation is related to the phenomenon of
globalisation in the following two aspects: the first is that socio-political changes
in a given culture create the need for new or modified text types, and the other is
that the increasing internationalisation of communication processes breaks down
text type boundaries.
The research of Schäffner and Adab (2001a) and Adab (2005) reflects some
hybridity characteristics of translation as a form of intercultural communication.
They focused mainly on the generic hybridity in literary texts, and did not explore
the features of hybridity in detail. The questions about hybridity in translated
languages remain pending issues in translation studies field.
2.4 Questions about Hybridity in Translated Languages
Most of the research on hybridity has focused on the discussion of it as a

theoretical concept, and studies of the effects of hybridity on the nature of translated
texts has generally been unsystematic (cf. Bond 2001; Gommlich and Erdim 2001;
Neubert 2001; Schäffner and Adab 2001a, 2001b; Simon 2001; Snell-Hornby 2001;
Tirkkonen-Condit 2001; Trosborg, 1997).
2.4 Questions about Hybridity in Translated Languages 17
The previous research on the topic has not been in a position to offer a clear and
empirically-grounded description of hybridity features in translated texts. To
embark on a systematic, empirical exploration of the characteristics of hybridity,
we need to specify what is meant by hybridity, and to acknowledge that hybrid
features exist at different linguistic levels, both source-language oriented and
target-language oriented.
A systematic and scientific description of hybridity features in translation
requires a comprehensive framework of analysis that draws on the availability of
large corpora. Questions about hybridity features in translated language can be
discussed systematically within a corpus analysis framework.
The present research explores the features of hybridity using corpora. The
possibility of storing and processing millions of words in English and Chinese
with necessary annotations, the development of sophisticated alignment software
that can line up English source texts and the Chinese translated texts at different
levels (such as sentence level), and new powerful search engines and concordancers
can provide us with the necessary tools to carry out a detailed analysis of
non-translated Chinese as well as translated Chinese.
The present research focuses on linguistic hybridity which can be described
systematically in two dimensions, i.e. interlingual hybridity and intralingual hybrid-
ity (see Fig. 2.1). Interlingual hybridity can be discussed with the help of a
parallel corpus, while intralingual hybridity can be discussed with the help of a
comparable corpus.
The present research investigates hybridity features in translated Chinese in
different time periods and different genres (such as Academic and Fiction) within
a corpus analysis framework based on Corpus Translation Studies.
Hybridity in Translation
Non-linguistic Hybridity
(Cultural, Generic, Translator’ s Linguistic Hybridity
idiosyncratic mannerisms, etc.)
Interlingual Intralingual
Hybridity Hybridity
Parallel Corpus Comparable Corpus
Different levels
(i.e., Lexical,
Syntactic, Discourse,
etc.)
Fig. 2.1 Hybridity in translation

2.5 Conclusions
The chapter has offered a general description of hybridity characteristics in trans-

lation. It reviews the previous research on hybridity in translation, explores the
reasons for occurrence of hybrid features in translated languages, and provides a
working definition of hybridity in translated language.
There are different types of hybridity in translation, including linguistic hybrid-
ity, cultural hybridity and generic hybridity. Different contextual situations result in
different kinds of hybridity features. This chapter offers a systematic division of
linguistic hybridity for the first time. Interlingual and intralingual hybridity can be
investigated with the help of parallel corpora and comparable corpora respectively,
and both types of corpora are basic tools for investigating the hybridity features in
the translated language within CTS.
References
Adab, B. 2005. Translating into a second language: Can we, should we? In In and out of English:
For better, for worse? ed. G. Anderman and M. Rogers, 227–241. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters LTD.
Bakhtin, M.M. 1981. Discourse in novel. In Dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin
(Edited by Michael Holquist; Translated by Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist),
ed. M.M. Bakhtin, 259–422. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.
Berman, A. 2000. Translation and the Trials of the foreign. In The translation studies reader,
Bhabha, H.K. 1994. The location of culture. London/New York: Routledge.
Bond, N. 2001. Interpreting the objectively “strange” and the strangely “objective”.
Across Languages and Cultures 2(2): 251–259.
Bussmann, H. 1998. Routledge dictionary of language and linguistics (translated and edited by
Gregory Trauth and Kerstin Kazzazi). London/New York: Routledge.
Chan, L.T. 2010. Readers, reading and reception of translated fiction in Chinese: Novel encounters.
Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing Ltd.
Dai, G. 2013. Fanyi zhong Yuanyu Touguo Xiaoying Yanjiu (“SL Shining Through” in translated
languages). Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press. 戴光荣. (2013). 译文源语透过效
应研究. 上海: 上海交通大学出版社.
Gommlich, K., and E. Erdim. 2001. Evolving imagery in the translation of Orhan Pamuk’s
Kara Kitap. Across Languages and Cultures 2(2): 237–249.
Han, Z. 2005. Wenxue Fanyi Zahe Yanjiu (Hybridity and literary translation). Shanghai:
Shanghai Yiwen Chubanshe. 韩子满. (2005). 文学翻译杂合研究. 上海: 上海译文出版社.
Hatim, B. 1997. Communication across cultures: Translation theory and contrastive text linguistics.
Devon: University of Exeter Pres.
Hatim, B., and I. Mason. 1997. The translator as communicator. London/New York: Routledge.
Hermans, T. 1996. The translator’s voice in translated narrative. Target 8(1): 23–48.
Klinger, S. 2015. Translation and linguistic hybridity: Constructing world-view. New York:
Routledge.
Kranich, S., J. House, and V. Becher. 2012. Changing conventions in English-German translations
of popular scientific texts. In Multilingual individuals and multilingual societies,
References 19
ed. K. Braunm€ uler and C. Gabriel, 315–334. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub-
lishing Company.
Levý, J. 2011. The art of translation (Translated by Patrick Corness). Amsterdam: John Benja-
mins Publishing Company.
Neubert, A. 2001. Some implications of regarding translations as hybrid texts. Across Languages
and Cultures 2(2): 181–193.
Newmark, P. 1988. Approaches to translation. New York/London: Prentice Hall.
Robinson, D. 1997. Translation and empire: Postcolonial theories explained. Manchester:
St. Jerome.
Schäffner, C., and B. Adab. 2001a. The idea of the hybrid text in translation revisited.
Schäffner, C., and B. Adab. 2001b. The idea of the hybrid text in translation: Contact as conflict.
Simon, S. 2001. Cultural and textual hybridity. Across Languages and Cultures 2(2): 217–226.
Snell-Hornby, M. 2001. The space ‘in between’ what is hybrid text. Across Languages and
Cultures 2(2): 207–216.
Teich, E. 2003. Cross-linguistic variation in system and text: A methodology for the investigation
of translations and comparable texts. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Tirkkonen-Condit, S. 2001. EU project proposals as hybrid texts. Across Languages and Cultures
2(2): 261–264.
Toury, G. 1995. Descriptive translation studies and beyond. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:
John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Trosborg, A. (ed.). 1997. Text typology and translation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Company.
Venuti, L. 1995. The translator’s invisibility: A history of translation. London: Routledge.
Venuti, L. 1998. The scandals of translation: Towards an ethics of difference. London: Routledge.
Wang, K. 1997. Fanyi Wenhua (On history of cultural translation). Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign
Education Press. 王克非. (1997). 翻译文化史论. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社.
Zauberga, I. 2001. Discourse interference in translation. Across Languages and Cultures 2(2):
265–276.
Chapter 3
Hybridity within CTS
Abstract This chapter introduces the development of corpus translation studies

(CTS) and it offers a good approach to investigate the hybridity features in the
translated texts. It reviews the convergence between corpus linguistics (CL) and
CTS, previous research on translated languages. It also explores the hybridisation in
the translation norm continuum, and the norm continuum of translation properties
can show the tendencies of hybrid features which can be located anywhere between
the typical patterns of the SL and those of the TL.
3.1 Introduction
As a relatively recent discipline, Translation Studies has undergone many changes

in methodologies and TS scholars have moved quickly to respond to the availability
of corpus linguistics and multilingual corpora.
Corpora have revolutionized nearly all areas of linguistic research, including
Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies over the past four decades (Xiao and
Wei 2014). Corpora and Corpus Linguistics techniques have made a significant
contribution to translation studies, not only to translation practice, but to translation
theory.
Corpus Translation Studies (CTS), as employed in this research, is a new
paradigm which can reveal the “regularities of actual behaviour” (Toury 1995,
p. 265). Toury also argues that “no empirical science can make a claim for
completeness and (relative) autonomy unless it has a proper descriptive branch”.
Arguments like this have had a great impact on Descriptive Translation Studies,
which has shifted the focus in translation research from the relationship between
source and target texts to translations themselves (1995, p. 1).
With the rapid development of corpus linguistics in the mid-1980s, corpus
linguists started to be interested in translated texts, initially focusing on literary
texts such as novels. For example, Gellerstam (1986) studied English translated
from Swedish, casting new light on what has been known as ‘translationese’ and his
work is regarded as the “first computer-assisted studies of translated texts”
(Zanettin 2013, p. 21), that is “all forms of translation which can in some form be

DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-0742-2_3
22 3 Hybridity within CTS
viewed as having been influenced by the original text, without the term [i.e.
“influenced”] implying any value judgment” (Gellerstam 2005, p. 202).
Bell (1991: 39) proposes to observe translator performance by analyzing the
translation products through “finding features in the data of the product which
suggest the existence of particular elements and systematic relations in the pro-
cess”. His proposal sparked great interest in building and exploring corpora of
translated texts, with the aim of analyzing features of translational language for
evidence of the relationship between translation as a product and translation as a
process. Corpora are useful in this respect because they help to reveal relations
“between frequency and typicality, and instance and norm” (Stubbs 2001, p. 151;
see also Xiao and Yue 2009, p. 238; Xiao and Dai 2011).
The following sections will discuss the convergence between Corpus Trans-
lation Studies (CTS) and CL, during which some established features and hypo-
theses for translated texts in pre-existing research are reviewed. The challenges for
TU studies and current trends in CTS are also introduced. As a new paradigm,
CTS opens up possibilities for making the detailed, empirical investigation and
analysis of hybridity features in translated languages feasible.
3.2 Convergence between CL and CTS
Laviosa (1998b: 474) observes that “the corpus-based approach is evolving,

through theoretical elaboration and empirical realisation, into a coherent, composite
and rich paradigm” which “addresses a variety of issues pertaining to theory,
description, and the practice of translation”. In our view, three factors have collabo-
ratively contributed to the convergence between corpus research and Translation
Studies. They are:
1. The hypothesis that translation universals (TUs) can be tested by corpus data
(see Sect. 3.3.3 of this chapter),
2. The rapid development of corpus linguistics, especially of multilingual corpus
research since the early 1990s, and finally
3. The increasing interest in Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS).
The marriage between CTS and CL is only natural in that corpus linguistics, as a
discipline stemming from the description of real linguistic performance, supplies
CTS with a systematic method and reliable data (Xiao and Wei 2014, p. 2).
Baker’s seminal article asserts that access to large corpora stood to change
the face of translation studies and offer a new approach to translation studies
(Baker 1993). This approach can reveal the “regularities of actual behaviour”
(Toury 1995, p. 265).
As an empirical method of linguistic analysis and description, CTS accommo-
dates the full evidence of corpus data by accounting for all the instances of the
linguistic phenomena in translations and analyses the evidence with the aim of
3.2 Convergence between CL and CTS 23
Table 3.1 Comparison between CTS and CL

Aspects CTS CL
Nature of data Attested, authentic instances of language use; focus on performance, not
competence
Translated products Authentic and
naturally occur-
ring texts
Language Linguistic patterns repeated across large numbers of language in large cor-
patterns pora; language patterns reflect and reproduce culture (Laviosa 2011)
Method Study the texts/text types comparatively across text corpora
Characteristics Social science and applied science; probabilistic norms; falsifiability, repli-
cability, predictability
Linguistic Association with extra-linguistic factors/contexts; language in use involves
behaviour both routine and creation (Stubbs 1996, p. 23)
nature
Task Elucidation of the nature of translated texts as a mediated Neo-Firthian tra-
communicative event (Baker 1993); dition in
linguistics;
Distinctive features of translated texts, translation norms/ Cross-linguistic
principles governing the production can be predicted/ comparison and
explained (Toury 1995) contrast
Form/meaning Interdependence
relation
Research Quantitative and qualitative approach can be integrated
paradigm Corpus-informed research (McEnery and Hardie 2012); Corpus-based and
corpus-driven (Tognini-Bonelli 2001)
finding “probabilities, trends, patterns, co-occurrences of elements, features or

groupings of features” (Teubert and Krishnamurthy 2007, p. 6).
Munday emphasizes the fact that the
corpus-based approach links with other methodologies and approaches, notably descriptive
studies, the study of the translation product and the interest in identifying typical features of
translation where the combination of rapid access to the ‘big picture’ of quantitative data,
supported with close critical analysis of the texts in their sociocultural environment,
comprises a complementary interdisciplinary methodology that reveals patterns that may
otherwise pass unnoticed (Munday 2008, p. 181).
CTS and Corpus Linguistics are based on common theoretical assumptions and
compatible methodologies which can be shown in Table 3.1.
They both focus on the authentic instances of language use and language
performance, but not language competence. The linguistic patterns and features
repeated across large numbers of language in large corpora can reduce researcher
bias and integrate quantitative and qualitative methods.
So, we can say, the convergence between CTS and CL is a natural development
process.
3.3 Previous Research on Translated Language in CTS
As an established subfield of the descriptive branch of translation studies, CTS has

developed rapidly and produced a lot of research in the following groups: the first
group investigates the hypothesis of translation universals put forward by Baker
(1993); the second group explores the individual variation which aims to investi-
gate translators’ style (Saldanha 2011); the third group is concerned with translation
norms and conventions and has attracted less attention than the first two; and the
fourth group discusses language change related to translation, and how translation
affects language change, such as House (2006a, b, 2007, 2011); Kranich
et al. (2011a, b); Kranich and Bicsár (2012); Kranich et al.(2012), etc. As the
field of enquiry has widened and deepened, there has been a corresponding increase
in the number and diversity of research questions to be addressed.
3.3.1 TU Hypotheses and Research
Since the end of 1970s, many large corpora of translated texts have been compiled,
in spite of the burdensome task of investigating the translations manually alongside
the source texts they translated. Two decades later, corpus linguistics offered
empirical Translation Studies powerful analytical tools. The first generation of
computerized translation corpora appeared, Mona Baker and her research team
put forward some important TU hypotheses and attracted considerable attention in
Translation Studies (Venuti 2000, p. 335; 2012, p. 273).
Because computerized analysis is governed by “abstract, global notions,” it may
emphasize norms over innovative translation strategies; and since these notions are
constructions derived from “various manifestations on the surface” of a text,
they exclude the various interpretations a text may have in different contexts
(Baker 1996, pp. 179, 185). Venuti (2000, p. 336; 2012, p. 274) also pointed out
that “computer-discovered regularities in translation strategies can support histo-
rical studies, confirming or questioning hypotheses about translation in
specific periods and locales”.
Since its birth, CTS has focused on translation as a product and tried to describe
features of translated language drawing on corpora. Baker (1993) argued that
corpora would provide an empirical basis for descriptive translation studies (see
also Kenny 2006), and offer some methods for investigation of translation pro-
cesses. In the process of translation, the translator is confronted with the task of
re-expressing ideas formulated in another language by someone else using a
new linguistic form. The constraints imposed on him or her leave traces on the
newly formulated text and distinguish it in several ways from text originally created
in the same language (Balasko 2008). One way to investigate the traces in practice
is to compare translated and non-translated texts “in the same language and in a
similar kind of domain” (Baker 2005, p. 290).
3.3 Previous Research on Translated Language in CTS 25
Translated language has been shown to exhibit certain linguistic features indi-
cating that it is a special type of text different from both source and target lan-
guages. The studies of linguistic features mainly on the basis of translated English,
have motivated the formulation of TU hypotheses. The following summary offers a
brief introduction to the major TU hypotheses.
Simplification refers to the “tendency to simplify the language used in trans-
lation” (Baker 1996, pp. 181–182), and as a result translated language is
simpler than target native language lexically, syntactically and/or stylistically
(cf. Blum-Kulka 1986/2000; Laviosa 1998a).
Explicitation is made manifest by the tendency in translations to “spell things
out rather than leave them implicit” (Baker 1996, p. 180) through more frequent use
of connectives and increased cohesion (cf. also Pym 2005; Chen 2006; He 2003;
Dai and Xiao 2010). There exists a long list for the research on explicitation without
the benefit of corpus data, such as Vinay and Darbelnet (1958/2000), Levý (2011)
on lexical impoverishment and explicitation, Duff (1981) and Frawley (1984/2000)
on explicitation of the ‘third code’, Berman (1985/2000) on clarification, expan-
sion, popularization, and other assumed properties of translations, Blum-Kulka
(1986/2000), etc. With the emergence of corpus linguistics, especially the corpus-
based translation studies, a considerable body of research has paid attention to the
topic of explicitation in translation, such as Baker (1996), Laviosa-Braithwaite
(1998), Kenny (1998), Olohan (2001), Klaudy (1998), Olohan (2001, 2002), Stew-
art (2000), Steiner (2005, 2008a, b, 2012), etc.
Normalization suggests that translational language displays a “tendency to
exaggerate features of the target language and to conform to its typical patterns”
so that translated texts are more “normal” than non-translated texts (Baker 1996,
p. 183). Mauranen (2008) names this process as “conventionalization”, and Wil-
liams (2005) argues that the written texts “produced by a population of translators
will conform more closely to the norms prevailing for written texts in the language
of translation” (Williams 2005, p. 8). Normalization can be influenced by the status
of the source text and the source language. In other words, “the higher the status of
the source text and language is, the less the tendency to normalize” (Baker 1996,
p. 183). The common methods for obtaining normalized translations exist in the
“use of typical grammatical structures, punctuation and collocation patterns or
clichés” (ibid), and it might be a consequence of “the tendency of translators to
conform to the conventionally established and standard practices typical of the
target language” (Xia 2014, p. 6).
Sanitization means that translated texts, with lost or reduced connotational
meaning, are “somewhat ‘sanitized’ versions of the original” (Kenny 1998,
p. 515). In her investigation, Kenny points out that the “sanitization” in the trans-
lated texts can be picked out by analyzing the semantic prosody. She finds that the
target texts “tend to use toned down vocabulary compared with their sources” (ibid:
pp. 515–516).
Under-representation, which is also known as the “unique items hypothesis”,
is concerned with unique items in translation (Mauranen 2008, pp. 41–42). It
suggests that the features which seem to be “untranslatable” for the translators
tend to be under-represented in the translations. These features, including pragmatic

particles or rare lexicalizations, are also sometimes regarded as “untranslatable”.
The under representation (unique items hypothesis) has been supported by the
studies from lexis, syntax, and the interface of syntax and pragmatics (Mauranen
2008, pp. 41–42).
Levelling out refers to “the tendency of translated text to gravitate towards the
centre of a continuum” (Baker 1996, p. 184), which Laviosa calls “convergence”,
i.e. the “relatively higher level of homogeneity of translated texts with regard to
their own scores on given measures of universal features” (Laviosa 2002, p. 72).
The tendency of levelling out is different from normalization and it is “neither
target-language nor source-language dependent” (Baker 1996, p. 184).
Gellerstam (2005) raises a number of interesting questions about different kinds
of language interference resulting from the process of translation which appears to
be distinguished from traditionally-recognised patterns of transfer. Gellerstam
(2005, p. 202) chooses the more neutral concept of ‘leaving fingerprints in trans-
lation’, that is all forms of translation which can in some way be viewed as having
been influenced by the original text, without the term implying any value judge-
ment. It is not just a case of one translator’s idiosyncrasies, but all traces of
translation.
The idea of the “source language shining through” means “. . .in a translation
into a given target language (TL), the translation may be oriented more towards
the source language (SL), i.e. the SL shines through [the TL]” (Teich 2003, p. 145;
see also Dai 2013a, b).
Most research attempts to find evidence against or for the TU hypotheses (Xiao
et al. 2010). And of course, the discussions and the quests for TUs are meaningful
for translation studies, not only in “deepening our understanding of translation”
(Mauranen and Kujamäki 2004, p. 2), but also in helping us explore more features
of translated language.
3.3.2 Challenges for TU Hypotheses
TU hypotheses have been subjected to a considerable amount of criticism that has

identified certain weaknesses (e.g. Hansen and Teich 2001).
First, the measures suggested for testing the hypotheses focus primarily on
quite shallow linguistic properties, essentially operating at word level, while
higher levels of linguistic organization are not considered (Teich 2003, p. 22).
Second, the properties of translations are frequently analysed on the basis of
monolingual comparable texts. As far as the English language is concerned, “a large
part of product-oriented translation research has been based on the Translational
English Corpus (TEC)”, which was “designed specifically for the purposes of
studying translated English” (Xiao 2010, p. 6). According to Xiao’s (2010) investi-
gation, “most of the pioneering and prominent studies of translational English”
have been based on TEC (ibid).
3.3 Previous Research on Translated Language in CTS 27
TEC disregards one of the major features characterizing the process of trans-
lation, that is, that translation is a process of text-induced text production, where a
given text is rendered in another language. Possible interference between the source
and target languages, which may also contribute to making translations a special
kind of text, can thus not be considered (Toury 1995).
Some debates and disagreements regarding certain hypotheses, such as “normal-
ization” and “explicitation” have been raised by House (2008) and Becher (2010)
respectively. According to House, “the quest for translation universals is in essence
futile, i.e. that there are no, and there can be no, translation universals”. She offers
the following reasons (House 2008, pp. 11–12):
1. Translation is an act that operates on language. Different translators have
their own preferred approaches to explaining linguistic phenomena and trans-
ferring the source languages to the target languages.
2. Translation is an act of performance, of parole, not of competence or langue.
Specific language-pair translated language features cannot be operationalized in
other language-pair translations.
3. Different translation directions have a different influence on the features of
languages. In House’s previous research (House 2006a, b), “explicitation” is
common in translations from English into German, while it is not the tendency
from the opposite translation direction.
4. Translation is genre-specific. The translation features of popular science texts
are different from the features of economics texts.
5. The diachronic development of texts shows the interaction among source texts,
translation texts and target native texts: the language of the source texts
may influence the nature of the translation text and also the nature of
comparable texts in the target language.
Figure 3.1 illustrates House’s skepticism about TUs. In House’s view, the
universals in translation can be divided into two major categories; one includes
obligatory and optional linguistic choices. The other variables such as the trans-
lator, the situation and the translation task make the hypothesis of TUs implausible.
House is skeptical about research on TUs. However, the repeated linguistic
features found in translated texts allows researchers to describe the language
phenomena in translations systematically. No doubt, House’s (2008) suspicions
about TUs remind us that translated language should be investigated cautiously.
For example, different language pairs present different language features in differ-
ent translation directions. Even so, the convergence between CTS and CL, espe-
cially the development of corpus technology make the description of the linguistic
features and characteristics of translated language objectively and scientifically
feasible and worthwhile.
Universals in Translation (Ls—Lt)
Linguistic sources
Other sources?
(Ls/Lt)
Obligatory Optional Translator Situational Translation

linguistic linguistic variables variables task variables
choices choices (who) (where,when) (why, who for)
Ideational Interpersonal Textual

metafunction metafunction metafunction
Construing of
Speech functions and Given/new—theme/rheme
experiential world
roles .reference ( “ phora ” )
“processes” and their
relation to one another .ellipsis
.mood
.conjunction
.modality .lexical cohesion
.explicitation?
.avoidance of repetition?
.simplification?
.over-representation of
.disambiguation? target and/or source items?
.standardisation? .under-representation of
source and/or target items?
.“ levelling out ” ?
Fig. 3.1 Universals in Translation (House 2008, p. 15)
3.3.3 CTS: Current Research on English-Chinese

Language Pair
The preceding section reviewed research which is based on English or other

European languages. The past two decades have witnessed the development of
CTS research on Chinese, a language which is genetically very different from
English and other European languages.
Li and Zhang (2010) investigate corpus related translation studies between 1995
and 2008, and divide this research into seven types. Other types of corpus related
research could be added since that date. These types include general surveys and
reviews of the use of corpora in translation research (Wang and Hu 2008; Dai and
Xiao 2010, 2011a, b; Li and Zhang 2010; Hu 2011; Huang and Wang 2011; Wang
2012), corpora in translation teaching (Qin and Wang 2007; Dai 2008; He 2008),
corpus design and methodological considerations (Wang 2004; Xiao et al. 2010a),
corpus data based studies of specific translational issues (Hu and Tao 2009; Li
et al. 2011; Xiao and Dai 2010a, b, 2014), corpora in dictionary making (Xu 2010),
and corpora in machine translation (Feng 2010), etc.
3.4 Hybridisation in the Translation Norm Continuum 29
Some research on the English-Chinese language pair explores the translated

Chinese language features with the help of comparable corpora, or parallel corpora.
Most of the research focuses on the TU hypotheses in relation to translated Chinese,
especially on simplification, explicitation and normalization. The linguistic items
discussed in this research are specific features in Chinese, such as TTR (type/token
ratio), sentence segments, ‘BEI’ (被) passive sentences, ‘BA’(把) sentences, etc.
(cf. Wang and Qin 2009, 2010; Wang and Qin 2014; Wu and Wang 2011;
Xiao 2010, 2011, 2012; Zhao and Wang 2013; Zuo and Dai 2013; Dai 2013a,
2013b, etc.).
So far CTS on the English-Chinese language pair has largely focused on testing a
certain TU hypothesis, and studies have generally adopted a corpus-based method
to investigate some specific language features of translated Chinese on the basis of
one kind of corpus: either a comparable or a parallel corpus. In fact, the language
features of the Chinese texts translated from English are too complex to describe
objectively and systematically on the basis of partial data, and a more compre-
hensive CTS requires a corpus analysis framework which combines the parallel and
comparable corpus, ideally from a synchronic and a diachronic perspective.
3.4 Hybridisation in the Translation Norm Continuum
Despite House’s reservations, the exploration of TUs reveal some general tenden-
cies for language features to occur in translated texts, and TUs offer a framework
for investigating and understanding the hybridity features which, despite being
frequently acknowledged, have attracted little detailed or theoretical attention in
CTS, “. . .the textual hybridity is a feature prominently seen in translations” while it
is “something more often acknowledged than theorized” (Chan 2010, p. 42).
The advent of CTS makes the detailed investigation of features of hybridity and
their theorization more feasible than it has been in the past. In order to offer
scientific descriptions for the translation products within CTS, Chesterman
(2004a) differentiates between two kinds of “Universals” in translation studies,
i.e., S-Universals capture the universal difference between translations and the
source texts, and T-Universals compare translations to other target language texts
and describe the differences between translations and comparable non-translated
texts.
We adapt Chesterman’s terms for our research on the features of hybridity in
translated language. Some features can be considered as S-oriented hybridity and
others can be T-oriented. The hybridity features can be observed and described with
the help of the authentic translated language corpora:
corpus-linguistic analytical procedures together with corpus-design principles were largely
compatible with Toury’s discovery and justification procedures involving an inductive and
helical progression from observable translational phenomena to the non-observable and
culturally determined norms that govern translators’ choices (Laviosa 2011, p. 15).
Translation as a norm-governed activity
Rules
Norms Idiosyncratic
(General, relatively
(preliminary, initial & operational) mannerisms
objective)
The preliminary The Initial Norm The operational

norms (Scalable continuum) norms
Adherence to the original Adherence to the target

Centrality
culture (Adequacy) culture (Acceptability)
…
-Source Oriented -Target Oriented
Fig. 3.2 Norms in translation
Fig. 3.3 Norm continuum (Adapted from Hansen-Schirra and Steiner 2012, p. 272)
As a norm-governed activity, translation and its all translational behaviour can

be described along a scalable continuum: one extreme is the general and relatively
objective rules, and the other is idiosyncrasies (idiosyncratic mannerisms), while
the central part of the scale is the “norm” (Toury 1995, pp. 56–58; 2012, pp. 65–67)
(see Fig. 3.2).
Toury (1995, 2012) discusses three kinds of norms, i.e., initial, preliminary and
operational norms. The initial norm in translation can help the translator make a
choice between another scalable continuum: from leaning heavily on the original
culture to close adherence to the target culture. The one extreme is source-oriented
and adequate translation, while the other extreme is target oriented and acceptable
in the target language (cf. Malmkjær 2005, 2008).
The norms continuum of translation properties displayed in Fig. 3.3 covers the
translation properties of “normalization” and source language “shining through”.
The hybridisation involving weakened characteristics in terms of frequency and
variation can be located anywhere between the typical patterns of the SL and those
of the TL:
3.4 Hybridisation in the Translation Norm Continuum 31
Type of Contrast
Language Typology Parallel Corpus
explanation Translation
Translation Process Properties Comparable Corpus
Register Reference Corpus
Grammar
Semantic
Lexis
Fig. 3.4 Overview of possible analysis scenarios (Hansen-Schirra and Steiner 2012, p. 271)
Fig. 3.5 Discovery vs. justification procedures (Adapted from Toury 1995, p. 38)
Different translation norms will influence the translation products which will
present different language features in lexis, grammar and semantic levels, and all
the translation properties can be explained from different aspects, such as language
typology, translation process and register with the help of data from different kinds
of corpora, namely parallel, comparable, and reference corpora. Figure 3.4 presents
an overview of the potential investigation of translation features in a top-down way
in Hansen-Schirra and Steiner (2012)’s research project.
In fact, all the translation features can be observed in Toury’s (1995) discovery
procedures. In the present research, we carry out the two procedures (discovery and
justification) with help of large sized corpora (see Fig. 3.5 below). All the questions
about the translated texts’ features and characteristics, such as deviation from
acceptability, probability, and cause-types (such as source language oriented and
target language oriented) can be discovered with the help of corpus data. The
language phenomena evidenced from corpora can help the researchers with the
formulation of higher-level generalizations and explanations.
The earlier prescriptive translation researchers relied largely on their intuition to

analyse segments of the translated texts they observed (rather than a representative
corpus of texts of the same genre), and consequently their research could not avoid
limitations to some degree. A number of these limitations can be overcome with the
help of corpora. The translation products and their identifiable constituents can be
observed and described objectively and systematically within the corpus analysis
framework. The hypotheses put forward by researchers can also be justified within
the CTS framework.
The hybridity features can be observed and described within the CTS framework
and with the methodological advantages of corpus-based qualitative and quanti-
tative work. An upcoming chapter (Chap. 5) will describe the corpora and software
included in the analysis framework.
3.5 Conclusions
The present chapter has offered a systematic description of CTS. CTS grew from
DTS with the development of CL and multilingual corpora. It evolved into a
coherent, composite and rich paradigm which can deal with different issues
concerning translation theories, translation practices and the description of lan-
guage features. All these studies shed light on the nature of translation.
The chapter reviewed previous research on translated languages within CTS.
The TU hypotheses in translation studies have aroused considerable attention and
interest. The investigations and quests for TU hypotheses are significant for trans-
lation studies in exploring the translated language features and deepening the
understanding of translation.
CTS can offer a new approach to investigate the hybridity characteristics of
translated language. The norm continuum of translation properties can show the
tendencies of hybrid features which can be located anywhere between the
typical patterns of the SL and those of the TL.
The potential explanations for translation properties can find their ways from
different aspects, including the typology of language, translation process and others
on the basis of a corpus framework. Toury’s discovery and justification procedures
can also be realized within the corpus analysis framework.
References
Baker, M. 1993. Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Implications and applications. In Text and
technology: In honour of John Sinclair, ed. M. Baker, G. Francis, and E. Tognini-Bonelli,
LSP and translation: Studies in language engineering in honour of Juan C. Sager,
References 33
€
Baker, M. 2005. Linguistic models & methods in the study of translation. In Ubersetzung/
Translation/Traduction: An international encyclopedia of translation studies, ed. H. Kittel,
A.P. Frank, N. Greiner, T. Hermans, W. Koller, J. Lambert, and F. Paul, 285–294.
Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Balasko, M. 2008. What does the figure show? Patterns of translationese in a Hungarian compa-
rable corpus. Trans-kom 1(1): 58–73.
Becher, V. 2010. Abandoning the notion of “translation-inherent” explicitation: Against a dogma
of translation studies. Across Languages and Cultures 11(1): 1–28.
Bell, R.T. 1991. Translation and translating: Theory and practice. London: Longman.
Berman, A. 1985/2000. Translation and the trials of the foreign. In The translation studies reader,
Blum-Kulka, S. 1986/2000. Shifts of cohesion and coherence in translation. In The translation
studies reader, ed. L. Venuti, 298–313. London/New York: Routledge.
Chan, L.T. 2010. Readers, reading and reception of translated fiction in Chinese: Novel encounters.
Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing Ltd.
Chen, J.W. 2006. Explicitation through the use of Connectives in Translated Chinese: A corpus-
based study, Doctoral Thesis. University of Manchester, Manchester.
Chesterman, A. 2004. Beyond the particular. In Translation universals: Do they exist?
ed. A. Mauranen and P. Kujamäki, 33–49. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publish-
ing Company.
Dai, G. 2008. Jiyu Yuliaoku de Yinghanyu Cihui Huyi Yanjiu (A corpus-based translation
between Chinese and English). Xiamen Ligong Xueyuan Xuebao (Journal of Xiamen Univer-
sity of Technology), 16(3), 94–98. [戴光荣. (2008). 基于语料库的英汉语词汇互译研究. hh厦
门理工学院学报ii, 16(3), 94–98.]
Dai, G. 2013a. Hanyu Yiwen Dapei Tezheng Yanjiu: Yuanyu Touguo Xiaoying Yanjiu (Collo-
cational features in translated Chinese: A case study of source language shining through).
Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, (1), 50–56. [戴光荣. (2013a). 汉语译文搭配特征
研究: “源语透过效应”个案探讨. hh当代外语研究ii,(1), 50–56.]
Dai, G. 2013b. Fanyi zhong Yuanyu Touguo Xiao Yanjiu (“SL Shining Through” in Translated
Languages). Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press. [戴光荣. (2013b). hh翻译中 “源语
透过效应”研究ii. 上海: 上海交通大学出版社.]
Dai, G., and Z. Xiao. 2010. Jiyu Zijian Yinghan Fanyi Yuliaoku de Fanyi Mingxihua Yanjiu
(Corpus-based studies on explicitation in translation). Chinese Translators Journal, (1), 76–80.
[戴光荣,肖忠华. (2010). 基于自建英汉翻译语料库的翻译明晰化研究. hh中国翻译ii,
(1),76-80.]
Dai, G., and Z. Xiao. 2011a. Hanyu Yiwen zhong de Huayu Chongshu Biaoji: Jiyu Yuliaoku de
Yanjiu (RMs in Translated Chinese: A corpus-based study). Foreign Language and Literature,
(3):184–193.[戴光荣,肖忠华. (2011a). 汉语译文中的话语重述标记:基于语料库的研究.
hh外国语言文学ii, (3), 184–193.]
Dai, G., and R. Xiao. 2011b Yiwen zhong Yuanyu Touguo Xiaoying Yanjiu: Jiyu Yuliaoku de
Yingyihan Beidongju Yanjiu (‘Source language shining through’ in translational language: A
corpus-based study of Chinese translation of English passives). Translation Quarterly, (62),
85–107. [戴光荣,肖忠华. (2011b). 译文中 “源语透过效应”研究——基于语料库的英译汉
被动句研究. hh翻译季刊ii, (62), 85–107.]
Pergamon Press.
Feng, Z. 2010. Jiyu Yuliaoku de Jiqi Fanyi Xitong (Corpus-based machine translation systems).
Shuyu Biaozhunhua yu Xinxijishu (Terminology Standardization & Information Technology),
(1), 28–35. [冯志伟. (2010). 基于语料库的机器翻译系统. hh术语标准化与信息技术ii, (1),
28–35.]
Frawley, W. 1984/2000. Prolegomenon to a theory of translation. In The translation studies reader,
Gellerstam, M. 1986. Translationese in Swedish novels translated from English. In Translation
studies in Scandinavia, ed. L.W.H. Lindquist, 88–95. Lund: CWK Gleerup.
Gellerstam, M. 2005. Fingerprints in Translation. In In and out of English: For better, for worse?
ed. G. Anderman and M. Rogers, 201–213. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters LTD.
Hansen, S., and E. Teich. 2001. Multi-layer analysis of translation corpora: Methodological issues
and practical implications. In Proceedings of EUROLAN 2001 workshop on multi-layer
corpus-based analysis, ed. N.I.D. Cristea, D. Marcu, and M. Poesio, 44–55. Iasi: University
Alexandru Ioan Cuza of Iasi.
Hansen-Schirra, S., and E. Steiner. 2012. Towards a typology of translation properties. In Cross-
linguistic corpora for the study of translations: Insights from language pair English-German,
ed. S. Hansen-Schirra, S. Neumann, and E. Steiner, 255–279. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH.
He, X. 2003. Yinghan Fanyi Guochengzhong de mingxihua Xianxiang (Explicitation in English-
Chinese Translation Processes). Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages, 26(4),
63–65.[贺显斌. (2003). 英汉翻译过程中的明晰化现象.hh解放军外国语学院学报ii, 26(4),
63–65.]
He, W. 2008. Yingyihan zhong xin de Yinyu Chonggou (Translation of metaphors with ‘xin’
(heart) in Chinese: based on instances from a Chinese-English parallel corpus). Sichuan Waiyu
Xueyuan Xuebao (Journal of Sichuan International Studies University), (2), 129–134. [贺文照.
(2008). 英译汉中“心”的隐喻重构:基于汉英平行语料库的考察. hh四川外语学院学报ii,
(2), 129–134.]
House, J. 2006a. Communicative styles in English and German. European Journal of
English Studies 10(3): 249–267.
House, J. 2006b. Text and context in translation. Journal of Pragmatics 38(3): 338–358.
House, J. 2007. Covert translation, language contact and language change. Chinese Translators
Journal 3: 17–25.
House, J. 2008. Beyond intervention: Universals in translation. Trans-kom 1(1): 6–19.
House, J. 2011. Using translation and parallel text corpora to investigate the influence of
global English on textual norms in other languages. In Corpus-based translation studies:
Research and applications, ed. A. Kruger, K. Wallmach, and J. Munday, 187–210.
London/New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Hu, K. 2011. Yuliaoku Fanyixue Gailun (Introduction to Corpus-based Translation Studies).
Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong Daxue Chubanshe. [胡开宝. (2011). hh语料库翻译学概论ii. 上
海: 上海交通大学出版社.]
Hu, K., and Q. Tao. 2009. Hanying Huiyi Kouyi zhong Yupian Yiyi Xianhua jiqi Dongyin Yanjiu
(Explicitation in the Chinese-English conference interpreting and its motivation). Journal of
PLA University of Foreign Languages, 32(4), 67–73. [胡开宝,陶庆. (2009). 汉英会议口译中
语篇意义显化及其动因研究. hh解放军外国语学院学报ii, 32(4), 67–73.]
Huang, L., and K. Wang. 2011. Yuliaoku Fanyixue: Keti yu Jinzhan (Corpus-based translation
studies: issues and progress). Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 43(6), 911–924.[黄
立波,王克非. (2011). 语料库翻译学:课题与进展. hh外语教学与研究ii, 43(6), 911–924.]
Kenny, D. 1998. Creatures of habit? What translators usually do with words. Meta: Translators’
Journal 43(4): 515–523.
Kenny, D. 2006. Corpus-based translation studies: A quantitative or qualitative development.
Journal of Translation Studies 9(1): 43–58.
Klaudy, K. 1998. Explicitation. In Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies, ed. M. Baker,
80–85. London/New York: Routledge.
Kranich, S., and A. Bicsár. 2012. “These forecasts may be substantially different from
actual results.” The use of epistemic modal markers in English and German original letters to
shareholders and in English-German translations. Linguistik online 55(5): 41–56.
Kranich, S., V. Becher, and S. H€oder. 2011a. A tentative typology of translation-induced language
change. In Multilingual discourse production: Diachronic and synchronic perspectives,
ed. S. Kranich, V. Becher, S. H€oder, and J. House, 11–43. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:
John Benjamins Pub. Co.
Kranich, S., V. Becher, S. H€oder, and J. House (eds.). 2011b. Multilingual discourse production:
Diachronic and synchronic perspectives. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub. Co.
References 35
lishing Company.
Laviosa, S. 1998b. The corpus-based approach: A new paradigm in translation studies.
Laviosa, S. 2002. Corpus-based translation studies: Theory, findings, applications. Amsterdam:
Rodopi.
Laviosa, S. 2011. Corpus linguistics and translation studies. In Perspectives on corpus linguistics,
ed. V. Viana, S. Zyngier, and G. Barnbrook, 131–154. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benja-
Laviosa-Braithwaite, S. 1998. Universals of translation. In Routledge encyclopedia of
translation studies, ed. M. Baker, 288–291. New York: Rougledge.
Levý, J. 2011. The art of translation (Translated by Patrick Corness). Amsterdam: John Benja-
corpus-assisted translation research in China. In Using corpora in contrastive and trans-
lation studies, ed. R. Xiao, 235–254. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Li, D., C. Zhang, and K. Liu. 2011. Translation style and ideology: A corpus-assisted analysis of
two English translations of Hongloumeng. Literary and Linguistic Computing 26(2): 153–166.
Malmkjær, K. 2005. Norms and nature in translation studies. SYNAPS 16: 13–19.
Malmkjær, K. 2008. Norms and nature in translation studies. In Incorporating corpora:
The linguist and the translator, ed. G. Anderman and M. Rogers, 49–59. Clevedon: Multi-
lingual Matters LTD.
Mauranen, A. 2008. Universal tendencies in translation. In Incorporating corpora: The linguist
and the translator, ed. G. Anderman and M. Rogers, 32–48. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters
LTD.
Mauranen, A., and P. Kujamäki (eds.). 2004. Translation universals: Do they exist? Amsterdam/
McEnery, T., and A. Hardie. 2012. Corpus linguistics: Method theory and practice. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Munday, J. 2008. Introducing translation studies: Theories and applications, 2nd ed.
London/New York: Routledge.
Olohan, M. 2001. Spelling out the optionals in translation: A corpus study. UCREL Technical Papers
13: 423–432.
Olohan, M. 2002. Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Interaction and reaction.
Linguistica Antverpiensia 1: 419–429.
Pym, A. 2005. Explaining explicitation. In New trends in translation studies, ed. K. Károly and Á.
Foris, 29–43. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiado.
Qin, H., and K. Wang. 2007. Duiyingyuliaoku zai Fanyi Jiaoxue zhong de Yingyong(Parallel
corpus in translation teaching: theory and application). Zhongguo Fanyi (Chinese Translators
Journal), (5), 49–52. [秦洪武,王克非. (2007). 对应语料库在翻译教学中的应用:理论依据
和实施原则. hh中国翻译ii, (5), 49–52.]
Saldanha, G. 2011. Translator style: Methodoligical considerations. The Translator 17(1): 25–50.
Steiner, E. 2005. Explicitation, its lexicogrammatical realization, and its determining (inde-
pendent) variables – Towards an empirical and corpus-based methodology. SPRIK reports
36: 1–43.
languages, ed. P. Siemund and N. Kintana, 317–346. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Pub. Co.
Steiner, E. 2008b. Explicitation: Towards an empirical and corpus-based methodology. In Mean-
ing in context: Strategies for implementing intelligent applications of language studies,
ed. J.J. Webster, 234–277. London/New York: Continuum.
Steiner, E. 2012. Generating hypotheses and operationalizations: The example of explicitness/

explicitation. In Cross-linguistic corpora for the study of translations: Insights from the
language pair English-German, ed. S. Hansen-Schirra, S. Neumann, and E. Steiner, 55–70.
Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH.
Stewart, D. 2000. Conventionality, creativity and translated text: The implications of elec-
tronic corpora in translation. In Intercultural faultines. Research models in translation studies
1: Textual and cognitive aspects, ed. M. Olohan, 73–91. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
Stubbs, M. (ed.). 1996. Text and corpus analysis: Computer-assisted studies of language and
culture. Oxford: Blackwell.
Stubbs, M. 2001. Texts, corpora, and problems of interpretation: A response to Widdowson.
Applied Linguistics 22(2): 149–172.
Teich, E. 2003. Cross-linguistic variation in system and text: A methodology for the investigation of
translations and comparable texts. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Teubert, W., and R. Krishnamurthy (eds.). 2007. Corpus linguistics: Critical concepts in linguistics.
Tognini-Bonelli, E. 2001. Corpus linguistics at work. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Company.
Toury, G. 1995. Descriptive translation studies and beyond. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:
Toury, G. 2012. Descriptive translation studies–and beyond, Revisedth ed. Amsterdam:
Venuti, L. (ed.). 2000. The translation studies reader. London/New York: Routledge.
Venuti, L. (ed.). 2012. The translation studies reader, 3rd ed. London: Routledge.
Vinay, J.-P., & Darbelnet, J. (1958/2000). A methodology for translation. In L. Venuti (Ed.),
The Translation Studies Reader (pp. 84–93). New York: Routledge.
Wang, K. 2004. Shuangyu Duiyingyuliaoku Yanzhi yu Yingyong (Construction and Application of
E-C Parallel Corpus). Bejing: Waiyu Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu Chubanshe. [王克非. (2004). hh双语
对应语料库研制与应用ii. 北京: 外语教学与研究出版社.]
Wang, K. 2012. Yuliaoku Fanyixue Tansuo (Exploring Corpus-based Translation Studies). Shanghai:
Shanghai Jiaotong Daxue Chubanshe. [王克非. (2012). hh语料库翻译学探索ii. 上海: 上海交通
大学出版社.]
Wang, K., and X. Hu. 2008. Jiyu Yuliaoku de Fanyi Hanyu Cihui Tezheng Yanjiu (A parallel
corpus-based study on lexical features of translated Chinese). Zhongguo Fanyi (Chinese
Translators Journal), (6), 16–22. [王克非,胡显耀. (2008). 基于语料库的翻译汉语词汇特
征研究. hh中国翻译ii, (6), 16–22.]
Wang, K., and H. Qin. 2009. Yingyihan Yuyan Tezheng Tantao: Jiyu Yuliaoku de Hongguan
Fenxi (A parallel corpus-based study of general features of translated Chinese). Waiyu Xuekan
(Foreign Language Research), (1), 102–105. [王克非,秦洪武. (2009). 英译汉语言特征探
讨——基于对应语料库的宏观分析. hh外语学刊ii, (1), 102–105.]
Wang, K., and H. Qin. 2010. A parallel corpus-based study of translational Chinese.
In Using corpora in contrastive and translation studies, ed. R. Xiao, 164–181. Newcastle:
Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Wang, K., and H. Qin. 2014. What is peculiar to translational Mandarin Chinese? A corpus-based
study of Chinese constructions’ load capacity. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 10(1):
57–77.
Williams, D.A. 2005. Recurrent features of translation in Canada: A corpus-based study,
Doctoral thesis. University of Ottawa, Ottawa.
Wu, G., and K. Wang. 2011. Jiyu Yingyu Leibiyuliaoku de Fanyi Wenben de Dapei Tezheng Yanjiu
(An English comparable corpora-based study of the collocational features in translated texts).
Zhongguo Waiyu (Foreign Languages in China), 8(5), 40–48. [武光军,王克非. (2011). 基于英
语类比语料库的翻译文本的搭配特征研究. hh中国外语ii, 8(5), 40–48.]
Xia, Y. 2014. Normalization in translation: Corpus-based diachronic research into twentieth-
century English-Chinese fictional translation. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars
Publishing.
References 37
Xiao, R. 2010. How different is translated Chinese from native Chinese? A corpus-based study of
translation universals. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 15(1): 5–35.
Xiao, R. 2011. Word clusters and reformulation markers in Chinese and English: Implications for
translation universal hypotheses. Languages in Contrast 11(2): 145–171.
Xiao, Z. 2012. Yinghan Fanyi zhong de Hanyu Yiwen Yuliaoku Yanjiu (Corpus-based studies of
translational Chinese in English-Chinese translation). Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong Daxue
Chubanshe. [肖忠华. (2012). hh英汉翻译中的汉语译文语料库研究ii. 上海: 上海交通大学
出版社.]
Xiao, Z., and G. Dai. 2010a. Hanyu Yiwen zhong Xiyu yu Cicu de Shiyong Tezheng: Jiyu
Yuliaoku de Yanjiu (A corpus-based study of idioms and word clusters in translated Chinese).
Waiyu Yanjiu (Foreign Languages Research),(3), 79–86. [肖忠华,戴光荣. (2010). 汉语译文
中习语与词簇的使用特征:基于语料库的研究. hh外语研究ii, (3), 79–86.]
Xiao, Z., and G. Dai. 2010b. Xunqiu Disanyuma: Jiyu Hanyu Yiwenyuliaoku de Fanyi Gongxing
Yanjiu (In pursuit of the “third code”). Waiyu Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu (Foreign Language Teaching
and Research), 42(1), 52–58. [肖忠华,戴光荣. (2010). 寻求”第三语码”:基于汉语译文语料
库的翻译共性研究. hh外语教学与研究ii, 42(1), 52–58.]
Xiao, Z., and G. Dai. 2011. Fanyi Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu de Xinkuangjia (A new framework for
translation studies and teaching: A comprehensive review of corpus-based translation studies).
Waiyu Jiaoxue Lilun yu Shijian (Foreign Language Learning Theory and Practice) (1): 8–15.
[肖忠华, 戴光荣. (2011). 翻译教学与研究的新框架: 语料库翻译学综述. hh外语教学理论
与实践ii, (1), 8–15.]
Xiao, R., and G. Dai. 2014. Lexical and grammatical properties of Translational Chinese: Trans-
Xiao, R., and N. Wei. 2014. Translation and contrastive linguistic studies at the interface of
English and Chinese: Significance and implications. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory
10(1): 1–10.
Xiao, R., and M. Yue. 2009. Using corpora in translation studies: The state of the art.
In Contemporary corpus linguistics, ed. P. Baker, 237–261. London: Continuum International
Publishing Group.
Xiao, R., L. He, and M. Yue. 2010. Using the ZJU corpus of translational Chinese in translation
studies. In Using corpora in contrastive and translation studies, ed. R. Xiao, 182–214.
Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Xu, H. 2010. Xuexizhe Yuliaoku yu Yingyu Xuexixing Cidian Bianzuan (Learner corpus and
Learner’s English Dictionary Compilation). Cishu Yanjiu (Lexicographical Studies), (3),
49–57.[徐海. (2010). 学习者语料库与英语学习型词典编纂. hh辞书研究ii,(3), 49–57.]
Zanettin, F. 2013. Corpus methods for descriptive translation studies. Procedia – Social and
Behavioral Sciences 95: 20–32.
Zhao, Q., and K. Wang. 2013. Yingyihan Fanyi Yuyan de Jieduanxing Tedian: Jiyu Lishi
Leibiyuliaoku de Kaocha (Periodicity as a linguistic feature of English-Chinese translations:
a corpora-based comparative study). Zhongguo Fanyi (Chinese Translators Journal), (3),
15–19. [赵秋荣,王克非. (2013). 英译汉翻译语言的阶段性特点:基于历时类比语料库的考
察. hh中国翻译ii, (3), 15–19.]
Zuo, S., and G. Dai. 2013. Jiyu Yuliaoku de Tibiaoji zai Hanyumuyu yu Hanyuyiwen zhong de
Fenbuchayi yu Jiedu (Aspect Markers in Native and Translated Chinese: A Corpus-based
Investigation). Waiguo Yuyan Wenxue (Foreign Languages and Literatures), (3), 181–188. [左
尚君,戴光荣. (2013). 基于语料库的体标记在汉语母语与汉语译文中的分布差异与解读.
hh外国语言文学ii, (3), 181–188.]
Chapter 4
Hybridity in Anglicised Chinese
Abstract This chapter offers a review of the hybridity of Anglicised Chinese since
the May Fourth Movement in 1919. The features of Anglicised Chinese have been
explored in different eyes of researchers as grammarians and Sinologists, and most
of them regarded the important role of translation for Anglicisation. Some research
on Anglicised Chinese with corpus data has been also presented in this chapter.
4.1 Introduction
In discussing the hybridity realized by translation in colonial and postcolonial

situations (see Sect. 2.3, Chap. 2), Venuti (1998) concludes by taking with China
as a case study. At the end of the Qing dynasty, especially at the turn of the
twentieth century, China “presents a rich instance of translators intent on building
a national culture by importing foreign literatures. Chinese translators pursued a
program of modernization by introducing numerous Western works of fiction and
philosophy” (Venuti 1998, pp. 178–179). The translations “result in a powerful
hybridity” and “promote the idea that the classic Chinese they employed was
inadequate to the task of understanding and absorbing foreign knowledge”
(Gunn 1991, p. 33), with the result that the translations “contribute to the emergence
of a cultural discourse in Mandarin vernacular” (Venuti 1995, p. 183).
Translation began to make a strong impact on Chinese at the end of Qing
dynasty, and the early decades of the twentieth century saw a number of innovations
transform the written language: vernacular Chinese (b aihua) displaced classic
Chinese (wény an), and the subsequent translations of Western works into Chinese
made the interlingual hybrid features, i.e., the Europeanized Chinese, prevalent in
translated and non-translated Chinese texts. This chapter offers an exploration of
the Anglicisms in modern written Chinese, reviews the previous research on the
hybridity in translated Chinese, and attempts to describe the influence of language
contact on the Chinese language.

DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-0742-2_4
40 4 Hybridity in Anglicised Chinese
4.2 Background of Anglicisms in Modern Written Chinese
The Chinese language changed greatly after the May Fourth movement in 1919.
The replacement of wény an with b aihu
a as the base of MWC (modern written
Chinese) became a hot topic of the New Culture Movement, which began just
before 1920 and included three themes, i.e., the Literary Revolution, democracy
and science. The aim of the movement was to create a “culture more consonant with
modern times and the common people” (Chen 1993, p. 509). Since the standard
written wényan was divorced from actual speech, it stood as the main obstacle to a
higher literacy rate. B
aihu
a was chosen as the replacement and served as the base
for a standard written language for all functions, including the literary, scholarly,
and official (ibid.).
The modernization movement attracted a number of elites to change society and
language to save China from exploitation and division by those who were seen as
Western imperial colonizers. At the later period of the Qing Dynasty, especially
during the Opium Wars (1839–1862), Lin Zexu (1785–1850), Wei Yuan
(1794–1856), and Guo Chongtao (1818–1891) appealed to their compatriots to
“learn from the advanced technologies in the West in order to resist the invasion of
the Western powers” (师夷长技以制夷: shı̄yı́ chángjı̀ yǐ zhı̀yı́), and suggested
setting up some translation organizations and schools to train translators. They
adopted translation as an important tool to introduce Western concepts, ideas, and
thoughts (Yuan 2006; Wang 2011, p. 92). The translators paid attention to the
question of whether the translated language—the translation medium—should be
wényan or b
aihua. Yan Fu (1854–1921), one of the famous translators at that time,
adopted the elegant wényan as his translation medium, because he believed that his
translations should be read by the elites.
The New Culture Movement called for b aihu
a as the medium which can be used
to enlighten the people more generally. However, b aihua, as a new-born language,
was thought to be vulgar and had to be improved and polished with help of foreign
languages. Wang (1999) studied the changing position of classic Chinese (wény an)
and vernacular Chinese (b aihu
a) in the English to Chinese translation in the late
Qing Dynasty and discussed the social, linguistic need to import the Western
features and adopt the Western ways of expression and sentence structures in
vernacular Chinese through translation. The May Fourth Movement promoted
baihu
a as the standard written language, and people thought that it could be
enriched by borrowing some language items such as vocabulary, morphological
and syntactic features from foreign languages by translation (Wang 2000, p. 139).
So, the translations, “often simply carried over the constructions of the language
they were translating from verbatim into Chinese” (Kubler 1985, p. 26). These
reasons account at least in part for the prevalence of Anglicised language in
translated Chinese, which impacted greatly on modern written Chinese.
4.3 Previous Research on Anglicisms in MWC 41
4.3 Previous Research on Anglicisms in MWC
Modern written Chinese adopted considerable hybrid features in the long process of
Anglicisation. The following section will present a brief review of the research on
Anglicisms in MWC.
4.3.1 Anglicisation
Anglicisation refers to the process in which the English language has exerted
influence upon other languages and transformed them according to the linguistic
rules of English (Kachru 1994; Tam 2009, p. vii). The terms used to describe this
process, i.e., Europeanization, Englishization, Anglicisation, and Westernization
are used interchangeably in the research literature to “denote the same process of
influence of Western languages, mainly English, on Chinese” (Hsu 1994, p. 167).
Anglicisation was initiated by the translation of Western works, mainly from
English, into Chinese, and Gottlieb (Gottlieb 2005) defines an “Anglicism” as
“any individual or systemic language feature adapted or adopted from English, or
inspired or boosted by English models, used in intralingual communication in a
language other than English”, and thinks of “translations as conveyors of Angli-
cisms” (Gottlieb 2005, p. 163).
“Although no empirical studies have yet tested the relative importance of trans-
lations in the Anglification of languages”, Gottlieb argues that “there is no doubt
that translations—not least those found in the popular media—constitute a driving
force in what certain critics have seen as the corruption of domestic languages”
(p. 176).
The next section will explore Anglicised Chinese from the particular perspective
of grammarians.
4.3.2 Anglicised Chinese in the Eyes of Grammarians
In China, Prof. Wang Li was the first scholar to undertake a systematic research
project on what he called ‘Europeanization’. As a grammarian, Wang investigated
‘Europeanized grammar’ in two books entitled ‘Zhōngguo Xiandai Yǔfǎ’ (中国现
代语法 A Modern Chinese Grammar, first published in 1944) and ‘ZhōngguoYǔfǎ
Lǐlun’ (中国语法理论 Principles of Chinese Grammar, first published in 1945).
The two books grew out of a series of lectures in the year of 1938 for the students at
National Southwestern Associated University (Wang 1984, p. 2).
Wang discussed some types of Anglicisms in Chinese translated from English;
they included lexical Anglicism, prevalence of disyllabic words, addition of sub-
jects and copula in the sentences, ‘kěnéngshı̀’ (sentence patterns for possibility),
‘bèidòngshı̀’ (passive sentence), ‘jı̀hao’ (plural forms for nouns, adjective markers,
verb markers, etc.), new ways of marking cohesion and coherence with conjunc-
tions and prepositions, new pronouns and new terms for weights and measures,
abbreviation and omission, reversed sentence patterns, quotation patterns, etc.
(Wang 1984, 1985). Some of these linguistic features existed in classic Chinese,
but the translations from English and other European languages made these lan-
guage phenomena more prevalent in modern written Chinese.
These two books have been described as “the most comprehensive and substan-
tial analysis of Europeanized Chinese constructions” and his approach is “descrip-
tive, analytical, synchronic as well as diachronic,” with all the examples for the
original Chinese taken from ‘Hōngloumèng’ (红楼梦 Dream of Red Mansions)
which was written in the “Beijing dialect during the last quarter of the
eighteenth century, and entirely innocent of foreign language grammatical influ-
ence” (Guo 2005, p. 22).
Wang’s observations were in general insightful and interesting except that in
some places, rather than dealing squarely with the process of Westernization, Wang
lapsed into a discussion of the principles of translating Western text into Chinese.
Wang himself realized this and excused these lapses on the ground that the process
of Westernization originated with the translation of Western text; hence it is
difficult to separate the two. “As most of the Westernization process has come
from English, the topic is restricted essentially to Anglicisation” (Tsao 1978, p. 41).
Beijing Shifan Xueyuan Zhongwenxi Hanyu Jiaoyanzu (The teaching and
research group of Chinese at the Department of Chinese, Beijing Normal Univer-
sity) (1959) introduced the development of Chinese vocabulary and grammar and
offered a detailed analysis of some Europeanized features in Chinese that have
become popular since the May Fourth Movement, 1919. Through creating new
words, or neologisms, and by adopting words from non-northern Mandarin dialects,
classic Chinese and foreign languages (especially the European languages), Chi-
nese vocabulary was enriched and greatly enlarged. The book lists some affixes that
developed through the influence of European languages, such as the suffixes (hua
化, shi式, xing 性, jie 界, yuan 员, jia 家, xue 学, l €u率, yan 炎, li
力,-fa 法, dian 点, guan 观, lun 论) (ibid., 1959, pp. 107–113).
Li (1962) also usefully discussed innovative features in Chinese grammatical
usage from 1949 to 1959; he observed the development in word-composition
(such as increase in simple dissyllabic words and compounds, affixation, mono-
syllabic words for slogans, the use of antithetical expressions and abbreviations)
and new grammatical forms.
New hybrid features increased over time. Chen (1993) introduced some new
features in MWC imported from European languages to “meet the demand for new
terms in the fast-growing fields of humanities, social sciences, and modern science
and technology” (Chen 1993, p. 513). Xiang (1993) and Diao (2006) investigated a
number of recent Europeanized grammatical norms in modern written Chinese,
though their discussion is brief. He’s (2008) research investigates Europeanization
in modern written Chinese (MWC) in greater detail, focusing on the frequency and
ratio of the language items in Europeanized Chinese compared to original Chinese.
4.3 Previous Research on Anglicisms in MWC 43
However, the two basic statistical methods he uses can not shed much light on the
reasons for language variations in modern written Chinese, for the findings are
affected by the arbitrary nature of the data chosen for his research.
Some research such as that of Tsao, (1978), Kubler (1985), and Xie (1990), has
paid more attention to the Chinese written in specific regions, especially Taiwan
and Hong Kong.
The Taiwanese scholar Tsao, (1978) discusses the Anglicisation of Chinese
morphology and syntax in the past two hundred years with examples taken from
newspaper and fictional prose. He provided revealing evidence and insightful
discussions on the impact of English on Chinese, though the discussion is limited
owing to the restriction of genre and domain imposed by having a small data set of
newspaper texts and one novel.
Hong Kong was a British colony (1841–1997) and has been a special adminis-
trative region of China since July 1st, 1997. During the British colonial era, English
was the sole official language from 1883 to 1974. In 1990, the Hong Kong Basic
Law declared English’s co-official language status with Chinese after the 1997
handover. English understandably exerted considerable local impact on Hong Kong
Chinese. Xie’s (1990) monograph discusses Europeanized Chinese in Hong Kong
and offers a detailed description of a number of Europeanized phenomena. But all
his analyses of Europeanized phenomena were based on examples picked up from
different genres and his sampling process was arbitrary.
Other researchers argue that Hong Kong Chinese is a synthesis of social,
regional and functional varieties with multi-orientational influence from Cantonese,
English and classical Chinese, and it is regarded as a transitional written interlingua
(cf. Shi and Shao 2006; Shi and Wang 2006; Shi and Zhu 1999, 2000, 2005;
Shi et al. 2001, 2003, 2006; etc.).
Anglicisation was initiated by the translation from English into Chinese, and the
Anglicised features in Chinese are in evidence at different levels, particularly at the
lexical and grammatical levels. Anglicised Chinese became an unavoidable pheno-
menon in the process of Chinese language development.
4.3.3 Anglicised Chinese in the Eyes of Sinologists
Many Sinologists, too, have naturally been interested in Anglicised Chinese.

Kubler (1985) investigated questions such as whether indirect language contact
can exert extensive influence on one language, especially on the spoken language
when compared with direct language contact. The actual features that Kubler’s
(1985) study discussed were included within the scope of Wang’s (1984) books and
so did not provide new findings about Europeanized grammar in written Chinese.
Restricted in data, it focused on just two versions of the same book named ‘Jia’
(家family) written by Ba Jin (1904–2005), a famous writer in China.
Gunn (1991) discusses the changes in written Chinese during the twentieth
century. He focuses on style and innovation in Chinese prose at the levels of
grammar and rhetoric, cohesion and coherence. He explores the formal conventions
of style with a social history in which “a Chinese educated elite following what they
perceived as the example of foreign nations in creating a national language, [. . .]
debated the nature and role of that language in writing as part of a nation-building
enterprise” (Gunn 1991, p. 1). It also “provides examples of innovations in gram-
matical constructions, rhetorical inventions, and sentence cohesion” for twentieth-
century written Chinese. The hybrid features adopted from European languages,
mainly from English are included in the list of innovations.
Prof. Masini from Italy explored the formation of the modern Chinese lexicon
and its evolution toward a national language in the period from 1840 to 1898
(Masini, tr. by Huang, 1997). His book discusses the contact with West and how
its influence on the Chinese lexicon led positively to the birth of a new national
language. He also observed the loans to and from Japanese (Masini, tr. by Huang,
1997). It has been claimed that greatest contribution of this book “lies in the
comprehensive list of new words formed under Western influence compiled by
the author, which will provide a basis for future comparative studies”, and which
“provides a foundation for future historical linguistic studies as well as lexicon-
driven studies of historical and social changes” (Huang 1996, pp. 230, 231).
Other studies are more cautious about the impact of European languages on
Chinese. Prof. Alain Peyraube, another Sinologist from France, turned his attention
to hybridised and Westernized Chinese (Peyraube 2000). Peyraube (2000) carried
out a chronological study which empirically demonstrates that, in the Chinese
language, there are more than 10 kinds of assumed Europeanized grammatical
phenomena that were frequently attested before its encounter with Western lan-
guages, mainly through translation, which is believed to have exerted its influence
from the second half of the nineteenth century. In other words, “regarding the
problem of actuation (origin of the forms), it is suggested that any influence of
Western languages on Chinese grammar has been quite limited”. However,
Peyraube also admitted that “such an influence could have been important, at
least in some registers of language, for the implementation (spreading) of the
so-called Western structures” (Peyraube 2000, p. 1).
Peyraube argued that, “the study of [the] Europeanization of Chinese interro-
gates a wide range of Europeanized structures in a discrete and piecemeal manner
without sufficient empirical observation and evidence as to the conditions and
timing under which the Europeanization process occurred” (Chan 2011, p. 39),
and most of the research shared a common weakness in that “no systemic compar-
ison of the language from the pre-contact period with that of the post-contact one
has been made” (Peyraube 2000, p. 2).
The following section will review some current research on Anglicised Chinese
that draws more systematically on corpus evidence.
4.4 Current Research on Anglicised Chinese with Corpus Data 45
4.4 Current Research on Anglicised Chinese

with Corpus Data
Most of the previous research on hybridised and Anglicised Chinese have been
based on personal experience and introspection. The development of corpus lin-
guistics and the availability of electronic corpora make research on Anglicised
Chinese more data-based and objective than was previously possible.
Hsu (1994) discusses the morphology and syntax of Anglicised Chinese with
small corpus data (namely, full coverage of two days’ issues of the newspaper
Central Daily News on Oct. 11, 1989 and Jan. 16, 1990, and thirty minutes of
coverage of radio news from the Broadcast Corporation of China on Dec.7, 1990)
(Hsu 1994, p. 169). It can be regarded as a tentative start to research on Anglicised
Chinese with the help of corpus data.
More recent research on Anglicisation has drawn more extensively on corpus-
based approaches. Ma’s (2010) thesis investigates the course of Europeanization of
Chinese, focusing on the grammatical structure of ‘Pronoun + De’ developing into
‘Pd + Zirentong noun’, ‘Pd + untransferred noun’ and ‘Pd + verb/adjective’.
She considers that the current wave of Anglicism in Chinese is different from
that of the May Fourth Period for specific reasons. The major method for language
contact between Chinese and English was realized indirectly by translation during
the May Fourth Period, but now it has developed from being only indirect to being
both direct and indirect. Direct communication between English native speakers
and Chinese people has become more and more common in modern times. The
impact of the English language on Chinese has limited to written Chinese around
the May Fourth Period, but it has since extended to face to face communication,
with more and more people in China now being able to speak English. The
Anglicised constructions which existed in written Chinese in the past now appear
in spoken Chinese.
Ma’s dissertation is innovative in that it addresses both spoken and written
Chinese, and it presents some findings on a number of Anglicised constructions
hitherto neglected by the academic world. The conclusions not only “richen and
deepen our understanding of the historical evolution of Chinese grammar and
rhetoric, but they also have a value for teaching Chinese as a second language”
(Ma 2010, p. IV).
Shen’s (2011) review offers a long list of Europeanized language features in
modern Chinese (Shen 2011, pp. 145–146). Actually, the list can be lengthened
with new items adopted from translated Chinese with English and other western
languages as the source languages, for Europeanization occurred at all language
levels including phonetic, lexical, grammatical and discursive.
All the previous research indicates features of Anglicised Chinese. The items
included in the following table (see Table 4.1) represent the Anglicised features in
modern written Chinese since May Fourth Movement:
The prevalence of these language features in translated Chinese texts can be
identified by comparing them to non-translated Chinese texts, and the comparable
Table 4.1 Anglicised features in Chinese

Types Anglicised features Examples
Phonetic Transliteration words kāfēi (咖啡 coffee)
Polyphonization (multi-syllable bı̄ngqı́lı́n (冰淇淋 ice-cream)
words)
Lexical Reduplication of word chanwēiwei (颤巍巍: shaky)
Reference zhe (者-or, er, ist)
Plural forms for nouns men (们 plural)
Noun markers xing (性-ness)
Verb markers hua (化-fy,-ize)
Metrological words yı̄ngbang (英镑 pound)
Neologism pı́nghéngchuı́ (平衡锤 counterbalance)
New affixes or analogized affixes du (度, th)
Distinguishing words zuı̀gāojı́ (最高级 the superlative)
Synonymy system with the same ‘gǎi’(改), ‘gǎigé’ (改革), ‘gǎishan’(改善),
root ‘gǎiliáng’ (改良), ‘gǎibian’ (改变), ‘gǎijı̀n’
(改进) used as synonyms which means
‘reform, amend’
Compound nominal measure réncı̀ (人次), jiacı̀ (架次)
words
Compound classifiers miǎolı̀fāngmǐ (秒立方米)
‘DV constructions’
(a) N + DE + V construction (a) fuqin de jiaox
un (父亲的教训: father’s
instructions)
(b) N + V construction (b) kōngqı̀ w urǎn (空气污染: air pollution)
(c) PP + DE + V construction (c) duı̀yú diannǎo de mı́lian (对于电脑的迷
恋: infatuation for computer)
etc.
Grammatical Europeanized pronoun
masculine (he) ta (他 he)
feminine (she) ta (她 she)
neuter (it) ta (它 it)
‘ta’ reference to abstract 在清朝时,我们可用民主主义作工具去推
concepts 翻爱新觉罗家的皇统。在今日,我们也可
以用他作工具去推翻那军阀的势力 (Dur-
ing the Qing dynasty we were able to use
democracy as a tool to overthrow the impe-
rial rule of the house of Aisin Gioro. Today,
we can also use it as a tool to overthrow the
regimes of the warlords) (Gunn 1991,
p. 274)
Pronouns modified by attribute cōngmı́ng de wǒ (聪明的我 wise / clever I)
Adverbial construction de (地)
Increasing of subject and linking- cf. Wang (1984, 1985)
verbs
(continued)
4.4 Current Research on Anglicised Chinese with Corpus Data 47
Table 4.1 (continued)

Lengthening of sentence 自幼在名士派的父亲的怀抱里长大的她也
Increased distribution of 感受了父亲的旷达豪放的习性 (She who
expanded attributives from her infancy had grown up in the
embrace of a father known for his scholarly
freedom from convention had also absorbed
her father’s broad-minded temperament)
(Gunn 1991, pp. 238–239)
‘zhiyi’(之一one of) qiánguozhı̄yı̄ (强国之一)
Subordinate clauses People who have enjoyed good educational
opportunities ought to show it in their con-
duct and language.
(已经享受过良好的教育机会的人们应该
在他们的行为语言上表现它) (Wang 1984,
p. 452)
Auxiliaries in series kěnénghuı̀ (可能会possibility)
‘YI + classifier (one + classifier) yı̀zhǒngjı̄yuán (一种机缘 a kind of good
+ abstract noun’ construction opportunity)
‘zai + Noun + de + Verb (+ Zhi) zailǎobǎnded uc
uzhı̄xia (在老板的督促之
+ xia’ (在N的V之下: under the 下)
+ noun)
Auxiliary words being The doctors do not yet know whether there
Europeanized may be any change in his condition during
the night. (医生们还不知道夜里他的情形
是否可能有什么变化) (Wang 1984, p. 459)
Sentence patterns for possibility 刚才有个信儿,说西边有可能敌人要出动
(I just got a note saying that the enemy may
be about to go into action west of here)
(Gunn 1991, p. 261)
‘BEI’ construction (被字句: bèishòuyǔgōngxunjiǎngzhāng (被授予功勋
passive construction) 奖章)
New syntactic configurations rúcǐ (namo, zhèyang) . . . yǐzhı̀ (na)
Coverbs tōngguò (通过), wéirao (围绕), zuòwéi (作
为)
etc.
Discursive Connectives being Europeanized He can both sing and dance (他又会唱歌,又
会跳舞)
Prepositions with the scope being in ¼ 在. . .. . .里,
extended and high frequency on ¼ 在. . .. . .上
before ¼ 在. . .. . .前
Compound prepositions ‘guānyú’(关于 about), ‘duı̀yú’ (对于 for)
Word order in sentence being 这个办法是最好的——在猫国 (This was
Europeanized the best means—in Cat Country) (Gunn
1991, p. 247)
Postposed attributive clauses 他的确读了几本基督教的书,反对这种无
政府主义的 (He had indeed read several
Christian books, opposed to the anarchism)
(cf. Gunn 1991; Ma 2010)
(continued)
Table 4.1 (continued)

Subordinating clause 虚心的人是有福的,因为天国就是他们的
transposition 国 (Blessed are the meek in heart, for theirs
is the kingdom of Heaven) (Gunn 1991,
p. 221)
Light verbs with high frequency ‘kāishǐ’ (开始: start), ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ (进行: pro-
ceed), ‘jiésh
u’ (结束: end), ‘jiāyǐ’ (加以:
give), ‘gěiyǔ’ (给予: give)
etc.
Chinese corpus can help the researchers carry out the identifying processes. The
reasons for the hybrid features in translated Chinese can not be found out without
the support of a parallel corpus. The author of the present research has elsewhere
reviewed the impact of the source language on Anglicised Chinese using an English
and Chinese parallel corpus, and he argues that the features of translated Chinese
have the potential to be absorbed into the linguistic system of non-translated
Chinese over time (Dai 2013b).
4.5 Powerful Hybridity: Impact of Anglicisation

on Chinese Language Development
It can be argued that the Anglicised translated Chinese has exerted a great influence
on the general development of the Chinese language. Many researchers have
offered their positive comments on the impact of Anglicised translation on Chinese.
To take an example, one noted Marxist literary critic of the early twentieth century,
Qu Qiubai (1899–1935) appeals to translation in order to improve what he sees as
the “deficient” Chinese language,
Translation—in addition to introducing the content of the original to Chinese readers—has
another important function, that is, helping us create a new modern Chinese language [. . .]
there is an almost complete absence of all those adjectives, verbs and prepositions that
express subtle differences and complex relationships. [. . .] Translation can indeed help us
create new words, new sentence structures, a rich vocabulary, and subtle, precise and
correct ways of expressing ourselves (Qu, 1931/1984, p. 266; translated into English by
Yau Wai Ping, in Chan 2004, pp. 153–154).
Wang Guowei (1877–1929), another scholar of the same era, was the first to
propose the concept of “new academic words” in China, and he strongly advocated
the introduction of Western academic terms to meet the needs of social develop-
ment. The language of the early Qing dynasty (1644–1911) cannot express the ideas
imported from Western culture, so there is a need for new concepts to be expressed
by “new academic words” (Wang 1997, p. 41;Wang 2006).
4.6 References 49
It is therefore no wonder that Pym (2008) argues that “translation was often used
as a way of developing the target language, actively using interference to impose
new lexical items and syntactic structures on the receiver” (Pym 2008, p. 324).
Morphology, the study of the formal structure of words, and syntax, or the
methods employed in combining morphemes and words into larger grammatical
units, are the two main aspects of grammatical form. Europeanized structures have
enriched and given new morphological and syntactic features to Chinese. This
enrichment also happened in the areas of stylistics, rhetoric (rhetorical inventions),
discourse and pragmatics (sentence cohesion).
Many drastic changes have taken place in Chinese since the beginning of the
twentieth century, and it has been suggested that borrowing from Western lan-
guages, through translations, might have had a significant influence on the devel-
opment of Chinese language. According to Peyraube’s (2000) investigation,
translations from European languages have played an important role in constructing
new ways of thinking among the intellectuals since the late nineteenth century
(Peyraube 2000, p. 14). This is another important issue which is beyond the scope of
the present research.
4.6 Conclusions
This chapter has offered a brief review of the hybridity of Anglicised Chinese,
particularly since the May Fourth Movement in 1919. Some major research on
Anglicised Chinese was reviewed briefly. Wang (1984), as the first systematic
researcher on Anglicised Chinese, offered a long list of the language features for
detailed descriptions and this greatly influenced following research. Many succes-
sive researchers have supplemented and enhanced Wang’s list with further
suggested features. Some research focusing on Hong Kong and Taiwan, have also
shed new light on particular varieties of Anglicised Chinese, and Sinologists’
research on the topic has also been reviewed in the chapter. It also reviewed the
previous studies on hybridity in Anglicised Chinese with some comparable
corpus data.
The following chapters offer a corpus analysis framework for describing the
hybridity features in translated Chinese, drawing the parallel and comparable
corpora data from different registers, with qualitative and quantitative approaches
from diachronic and synchronic perspectives.
References
Beijing Shifan Xueyuan Zhongwenxi Hanyujiaoyanzu, Zhongguo Yuwen Zazhishe. (eds.). 1959.
Wusi Yilai Hanyu Shumian Yuyan de Bianqian he Fazhan (Changes and developments in the
Chinese written language since the May Fourth Movement). Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan.
[北京师范学院中文系汉语教研组编著,中国语文杂志社编. (1959). hh五四以来汉语书面语

言的变迁和发展ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
Chan, L.T. (ed.). 2004. Twentieth-century Chinese translation theory: Modes, issues and debates.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Chan, C.H. 2011. The Europeanization of modern written Chinese: A case study of the
changing third person pronouns in the twentieth century and beyond. Berlin: Peter Lang AG.
Chen, P. 1993. Modern written Chinese in development. Language in Society 22(4): 505–538.
Dai, G. 2013b. Fanyi zhong Yuanyu Touguo Xiao Yanjiu (“SL Shining Through” in translated
languages). Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press. [戴光荣. (2013b). hh翻译中 “源语
Diao, Y. 2006. Xiandai HanyuShi (A History of Modern Chinese). Fuzhou: Fujian Renmin
Chubanshe. [刁晏斌. (2006). hh现代汉语史ii. 福州: 福建人民出版社.]
Gottlieb, H. 2005. Anglicism and translation. In In and out of English: For better, for worse?
ed. G. Anderman and M. Rogers, 161–184. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Gunn, E. 1991. Rewriting Chinese: Style and innovation in twentieth-century Chinese prose.
Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Guo, H. 2005. Yingyu dui Xiandai Hanyu de Yingxiang: Yuyan Renzhi Yanjiufa (The influence of
English on Modern Chinese: A cognitive research). Shanghai Shi : Shanghai Jiaotong Daxue
Chubanshe. [郭鸿杰. (2005). hh英语对现代汉语的影响:语言认知研究法ii. 上海: 上海交通
大学出版社.]
He, Y. 2008. Xiandai Hanyu Ouhua Yufa Xianxiang Yanjiu (On Europeanized Chinese grammar).
Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [贺阳. (2008). hh现代汉语欧化语法现象研究ii. 北京: 商务印
书馆.]
Hsu, J. 1994. Englishization and language change in modern Chinese in Taiwan. World Englishes
13(2): 167–184.
Huang, C. 1996. Review of Federico Masini ‘The formation of modern Chinese Lexicon and its
evolution toward a National language: The period from 1840 to 1898’. The China Quarterly
145: 230–231.
Kachru, B.B. 1994. Englishization and contact linguistics. World Englishes 13(2): 135–154.
Kubler, C.C. 1985. A study of Europeanized grammar in modern written Chinese. Taipei:
Student Book Company.
Li, C. 1962. New features in Chinese grammatical usage. Berkeley: University of California.
Ma, C. 2010. Xiandai Hanyu Ouhua Jiegou Yanjiu (A study on Europeanization constructions in
Modern Chinese, Doctoral Dissertation). Anhui University. [马春华. (2010). hh现代汉语欧化
结构研究ii(博士论文). 安徽大学.]
Masini, F. 1997. The formation of Modern Chinese lexicon and its evolution toward a
National language: The period from 1840 to 1898. Shanghai: Hanyu Dacidian Chubanshe.
[意]马西尼著,黄河清译. (1997). hh现代汉语词汇的形成:十九世纪汉语外来词研究ii. 上海:
汉语大词典出版社.
Peyraube, A. 2000. Westernization of Chinese grammar in the 20th century: Myth or reality?二十
世纪汉语语法的西化:迷思抑或真相? Journal of Chinese Linguistics 28(1):1–25.
Pym, A. 2008. On Toury’s laws of how translators translate. In Beyond descriptive translation
studies Investigations in homage to Gideon Toury, ed. A. Pym, M. Shlesinger, and D. Simeoni,
311–328. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Shen, G. 2011. Xiandai Hanyu Ouhua Yufa Xianxiang zhong de Riyu Yinsu Wenti (The Japanese
influence on the Europeanized Chinese grammar). “東アジア文化交渉研究”別冊, 7:141–150.
[沈国威. (2011). 现代汉语 “欧化语法现象”中的日语因素问题. “東アジア文化交渉研
究”別冊,(7),141–150.]
Shi, D., J. Shao. 2006. Gangshi Zhongwen yu Yuyan Bianti (‘Hongkong Chinese’ and language
variations). Huadong Shifan Daxue Xuebao (Journal of East China Normal University) 38(2),
84–90. [石定栩,邵敬敏. (2006). “港式中文”与语言变体. hh华东师范大学学报ii, 38(2),
84–90.]
References 51
Shi, D., D. Wang. 2006. Xianggang Hanyu Shumianyu de Yufa Tedian (Grammatical Features of
written in Chinese Hong Kong). Zhongguo Yuwen (Studies of the Chinese Language), 2:
118–127. [石定栩,王冬梅. (2006). 香港汉语书面语的语法特点. hh中国语文ii, (2),
118–127.]
Shi, D., Z. Zhu. 1999. Yingyu dui Xianggang Shumian Hanyu Jufa de Yingxiang (The influence of
English on Hong Kong Chinese syntactic structures). Waiguoyu (Journal of Foreign Lan-
guages), 4: 2–11. [石定栩,朱志瑜. (1999). 英语对香港书面汉语句法的影响. hh外国语ii, (4),
2–11.]
Shi, D., Z. Zhu. 2000. Yingyu yu Xianggang Shumian Hanyu (English influence on Hong Kong
written Chinese). Waiyu Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu (Foreign Language Teaching and Researching),
32(3): 200–207. [石定栩,朱志瑜. (2000). 英语与香港书面汉语. hh外语教学与研究ii, 32(3),
200–207.]
Shi, D., Z. Zhu. 2005. Yingyu dui Xianggang Shumian Hanyu Cihui de Yingxiang (English
Influence on Hong Kong Written Chinese: The case of homographs). Waiguoyu (Journal of
Foreign Languages), 5: 2–9.[石定栩,朱志瑜. (2005). 英语对香港书面汉语词汇的影响——
香港书面汉语和标准汉语中的同形异义词. hh外国语ii, (5), 2–9.]
Shi, D., J. Su, and Z. Zhu. 2001. Xianggang Shumianyu de Jufa Tedian (Syntactic Features of
Written Hong Kong Chinese). Zhongguo Yuwen (Studies of the Chinese Language), 6:
558–565. [石定栩,苏金智,朱志瑜. (2001). 香港书面语的句法特点. hh中国语文ii, (6),
558–565.]
Shi, D., Z. Zhu, and C. Wang. 2003. Xianggang Shumian Hanyu zhong de Yingyu Jufa Qianyi
(Syntactic shift in Hong Kong Written Chinese). Waiyu Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu (Foreign language
teaching and research), 35(1): 4–13.[石定栩,朱志瑜,王灿龙. (2003). 香港书面汉语中的英
语句法迁移. hh外语教学与研究ii, 35(1), 4–13.]
Shi, D., J. Shao, and Z. Zhu. 2006. Gangshi Zhongwen yu Biaozhun Zhongwen de Bijiao
(‘Hongkong Chinese’ and Standard Chinese). Hong Kong: Hong Kong Educational Publishing
Company. [石定栩,邵敬敏,朱志瑜. (2006). hh港式中文与标准中文的比较ii. 香港: 香港教
育图书公司.]
Tam, K. (ed.). 2009. Englishization in Asia: Language and cultural issues. Hong Kong:
Open University of Hong Kong Press.
Tsao, F. 1978. Anglicization of Chinese morphology and syntax in the past two hundred years.
Studies in English Literature & Linguistics 2: 41–54.
Venuti, L. 1995. The translator’s invisibility: A history of translation. London/New York:
Routledge.
Wang, L. 1984. Wang Li Wenji Diyijuan: Zhongguo Yufa Lilun (The complete works of Wang Li,
Volume 1, Chinese grammar theory). Jinan: Shandong Edecation Press. [王力. (1984). hh王力
文集(第一卷)中国语法理论ii. 济南: 山东教育出版社.]
Wang, L. 1985. Wang Li Wenji Di’erjuan: Zhongguo Xiandai Yufa (The complete works of Wang
Li, Volume 2, Modern Chinese grammar). Jinan: Shandong Edecation Press.[王力. (1985).
hh王力文集(第二卷)中国现代语法ii. 济南: 山东教育出版社.]
Wang, G. 1997. Wang Guowei Wenji Disanjuan (The complete works of Wang Guowei: Volume
3). Beijing: Zhongguo Wenshi Chubanshe. [王国维. (1997). hh王国维文集(第三卷)ii. 北京:
中国文史出版社.]
Wang, H. 1999. “Wenyan or Baihua: On the issue of translation language since the Late Qing”.
Journal of Translation Studies, (3), 49–80. [王宏志. (1999). 文言与白话: 晚晴以来翻译语言
的考察. Journal of Translation Studies, (3), 49–80.]
Wang, H. 2000. Europeanization: discussions on the language of translation during May Fourth
period. In Fanyi de Lilun Jiangou yu Wenhua Toushi (Theoretical construction of translation from
a cultural perspective), ed. T. Xie, 119–139. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education
Press. [王宏志. (2000). “欧化”: “五四”时期有关翻译语言的讨论. 谢天振, 翻译的理论建构
与文化透视 (pp. 119–139). 上海: 上海外语教育出版社.]
Wang, Q. 2006. Huise: Yige Pianyi de Chidu (Obscurity in academic genre). Fujian Luntan
(Fujian Forum), 10: 78–81. [王茜. (2006). 晦涩: 一个偏移的尺度. hh福建论坛ii, (10), 78–81.]
Wang, H. 2011. Between translation and literature. Nanjing: Nanjing University Press. [王宏志.
(2011). 翻译与文学之间. 南京: 南京大学出版社.]
Xiang, X. 1993. Jianming Hanyushi Xia (A history of Chinese language, Volume II). Beijing:
Gaodeng Jiaoyu Chubanshe. [向熹. (1993). hh简明汉语史(下)ii. 北京: 高等教育出版社.]
Xie, Y. 1990. Xiandai Hanyu Ouhua Yufa Gailun (Europeanization of Chinese grammar). Hong Kong:
Guangming Tushu Gongsi. [谢耀基. (1990). hh现代汉语欧化语法概论ii. 香港: 光明图书公司.]
Yuan, J. 2006. Jindai Xifang Chuanjiaoshi dui Baihuawen de Yingxiang (The influence to verna-
cular Chinese by missionaries). Ershiyi Shiji (The 21 Century), 98: 77–86. [袁进. (2006). 近代
西方传教士对白话文的影响. hh二十一世纪ii, (98), 77–86.]
Chapter 5
Corpus Methodology and Design
Abstract This chapter explores the general theoretical issues of corpus design for
Translation Studies and demonstrates how these issues relate to the design of
the specific corpora used in the present research. It also introduces the corpora
that have been designed to investigate the hybridity features of translated and
native Chinese systematically, drawing on a corpus analysis framework which
consists of parallel and comparable corpora, general and specialized corpora,
synchronic and diachronic corpora. It also introduces the software used in the
corpus analysis framework, such as alignment system which has been designed
by the author, corpus concordancing software, etc.
5.1 Theoretical Considerations
A corpus approach to the investigation of naturally occurring language is intrinsi-

cally empirical (Neumann and Hansen-Schirra 2012, p. 21). An empirical method is
different from a rational approach. According to McEnery and Wilson (2001),
a fundamental division exists between relying on naturally occurring observations
and relying on artificially induced observations. A “rationalist theory” is based on
“artificial behavioural data and conscious introspective judgements”, while an
“empiricist approach” is “dominated by the observation of naturally occurring
data, typically through the medium of the corpus” (McEnery and Wilson 2001,
p. 5).
The “empirical method” refers to a research method which investigates
actual data. In this sense, “empirical” indicates that the information, knowledge
and understanding are gathered through experience and direct data collection
(Black 1999, p. 3). “Research is empirical when the questions that one asks
can most appropriately be answered by looking at the world rather than by thinking
about it. That is, a question is empirical when the inquiry is governed by the
Rules of Looking rather than the Rules of Thinking” (Sumser 2001, p. 6).
The empirical method presents several characteristics which include the
following:

DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-0742-2_5
54 5 Corpus Methodology and Design
Firstly, it allows systematic observations with the goal of producing replicable

studies, and it follows precise methods that are logically consistent, transparent
and open to scrutiny.
Secondly, two characteristics of empirical research are reliability and validity.
Reliability is “concerned with the exactitude of the measuring instrument or
method”, and tools which “do not change their interpretation of a given element”
(Neumann and Hansen-Schirra 2012, p. 22). Validity refers to “whether the
choice of method is appropriate to the phenomenon under investigation and
whether the chosen indicators actually measure the concept under investigation”
(ibid).
Thirdly, the empirical method has a verifiable nature. Popper argues that theories
cannot be verified absolutely and forever; however, they can be falsified,
i.e. they can be proven to be wrong (Popper 1959/2002).
Bausell’s (1986) review also presents some other characteristics of empirical
method (cf. Bausell 1986). An empirical method assumes that the “pursuit of truth
is desirable, but often this constitutes trying to develop a model of reality, an
explanation of events employing abstract and intangible concepts” (Black 1999,
p. 6).
A corpus approach to dealing with naturally occurring language faces the nature
of the linguistic system. It has been argued that this system is “inherently probabi-
listic, and that frequency in text [is] the instantiation of probability in the grammar”
(Halliday 2005, p. 64). We cannot directly observe abstract concepts. Conse-
quently, we are working with hypothetical links between our abstract concepts
and observable parts of reality, e.g. language, most of the time. The process of
deriving observable indicators from abstract concepts is called operationalization.
Only these operationalized features are actually observable in texts. It is a major
task of the quantitative researcher to work out the relationship between the abstract
concepts and the features observed in the corpus in order to ensure the validity of
the study (Hansen-Schirra et al. 2012, pp. 21–23).
Quantitative research depends on automatic annotation since the amount of text
involved cannot be processed manually, particularly if the annotation is to comprise
several layers (Hansen-Schirra et al. 2012, p. 23). This research follows a quanti-
tative method and takes the following situations into account. The first one is that an
annotation program is a basic tool for corpus analysis, and annotation tools
can provide highly reliable results, with computer-assisted manual checking.
The second point is that a corpus can only offer examples and cannot itself explain
the difference between translated and non-translated texts; in other words, data is
not its own interpretation.
5.2 Corpora Design for the Framework 55
5.2 Corpora Design for the Framework
The corpora used in the present research were specifically created in order to
investigate the hypothesized linguistic hybridity of translated Chinese. It covers
certain aspects that other translation corpora like the TEC do not cover.
The design of the corpora was guided by certain theoretical assumptions. Trans-
lated language features should be observed as systematic, recurring features that can
only “be accounted for empirically and more concretely with a quantitative approach”
(Hansen-Schirra et al. 2012, p. 24). We assumed that any hybrid characteristic of a
translated text will occur systematically in a wide range of different translations. The
corpus design was guided by a number of criteria including “a size sufficient to allow
generalizable statements, balance as well as comparability across languages” (ibid.).
The corpus is divided into the following three sub-corpora: English Originals (EO),
Chinese Translations (CTrans), Chinese Original texts (CO). So the corpus contains
parallel parts (originals in English language and their translations in Chinese), mono-
lingual comparable parts (original Chinese and translated Chinese), and bilingual
comparable parts (originals in English and Chinese) (see Fig. 1.2 in Chap. 1).
Besides including parallel and comparable corpora in the framework, the suite of
corpora also consists of general and specialized corpora, synchronic and diachronic
corpora. The corpora adopted in the present research are shown in Fig. 5.1.
The translated Chinese texts include two parts, one consists of Chinese trans-
lations published during the 1930–1960s (TT1), the other consists of Chinese texts
published during the 1970–2000s (TT2). It should be explained the reasons for
choosing the corpus samples from 1930 to 2000s here: as mentioned in Sect. 4.3.2,
Chap. 4, Wang’s two books grew out of a series of lectures given in 1938, and the
time period of the language items discussed for the Anglicised Chinese were around
the 1930s. His explorations have exerted an immense influence on later studies on
the topic. The texts published around 2000s for corpus samples can be easily
ST-1 (English)
ST-2 (English)
E-C Parallel Corpus-1 Monolingual E-C Parallel Corpus-2

diachronic Translated
Chinese Comparable
TT1 (Chinese translations: 1930s-1960s) TT2 (Chinese translations: 1970s-2000s)
Corpus-1
Monolingual synchronic Monolingual synchronic

Chinese Comparable Corpus-1 Monolingual diachronic Chinese Comparable Corpus-2
Native Chinese
Comparable Corpus-2
NT1 (Native Chinese: 1930s-1960s) NT2 (Native Chinese: 1970s-2000s)
Fig. 5.1 Corpora used in this research

accessed to, so the present research wants to investigate the features of the trans-
lated Chinese from the 1930s till the 2000s. TT1 and TT2 are comparable in the text
genres they include, and together they comprise a monolingual diachronic trans-
lated Chinese comparable corpus. All the texts are translated from English.
The non-translated Chinese texts can also be divided into two parts, one is a
collection of texts published during the 1930–1960s (NT1), the other is a collection
of texts published during the 1970–2000s (NT2). NT1 and NT2 are also comparable
in text genres and together comprise a monolingual diachronic native Chinese
comparable corpus.
TT1 and NT1, TT2 and NT2 are also comparable in text genres which were
published during the same time periods. They comprise a set of monolingual syn-
chronic Chinese comparable corpora.
5.2.1 Parallel Corpus
The present research focuses on translated Chinese, so an English-Chinese unidirec-

tional parallel corpus which consists of English source texts and Chinese translated
texts is indispensable. Granger (2003/2007) points out that parallel corpora have the
main drawback of “displaying traces of the source text” and cannot be “considered as
reliable data as regards the target language” (Granger 2003/2007, p. 19). But they are
“an ideal resource for establishing equivalence between languages since they convey
the same semantic content” (ibid, pp. 19–20). Granger makes this statement from the
point of view of language teaching/learning. We can change this alleged “drawback”
into an advantage in our research framework, for parallel corpora can help us to trace
the influence of the English source language on the translated Chinese language.
There exist several English-Chinese parallel corpora, but they are not available to
all researchers for reasons to do with the protection of intellectual property. The present
research adopts two parallel corpora named Babel and GCEPC which have been built
by Dr. Richard Xiao at Lancaster University and Prof. Wang Kefei at Beijing Foreign
Studies University respectively, which are both aligned at the sentence level.
The Babel English-Chinese Parallel Corpus which covers mixed genres, consists
of 327 English articles and their translations into Mandarin Chinese. Of these,
115 texts were collected from the World of English between October 2000 and
February 2001 while the remaining 212 texts were collected from Time magazine
from September 2000 to January 2001. The corpus contains a total of 253,633
English words in the source texts and 287,462 Chinese tokens in the translations
(Dai and Xiao 2011).1 Table 5.1 shows the basic information about Babel.
GCEPC (General Chinese-English Parallel Corpus) is the largest parallel corpus
of English and Chinese currently in existence. This is a Chinese-English
1
More information about Babel is given on the website http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/fass/projects/
corpus/babel/babel.htm.
Table 5.1 Babel parallel Babel (E-C parallel corpus)

corpus
Text file en cn
Tokens (running words) in text 255,031 241,752
Tokens used for word list 239,603 238,460
Types (distinct words) 19,303 20,352
GCEPC
C-E E-C
Chinese Original English Original

(Fict.) (Fict.)
English Translation Chinese Translation

(Fict.) (Fict.)
English Original
Chinese Original
(Non-Fict.)
(Non-Fict.)
Chinese Translation
English Translation
(Non-Fict.) (Non-Fict.)
Fig. 5.2 Basic construction of GCEPC
bidirectional parallel corpus containing about 30 million English words and Chi-
nese characters at the time of writing. It has four sub-corpora, namely Chinese-to-
English Literature, Chinese-to-English Non-literature, English-to-Chinese Litera-
ture, and English-to-Chinese Non-literature (Wang 2004; Wang and Qin 2010).
Figure 5.2 indicates the basic construction of GCEPC.
Figure 5.2 shows that GCEPC can help us build two English-Chinese parallel
corpora; one is fiction, and the other is non-fiction. The following tables show
information about the two corpora:
Table 5.2 illustrates the E-C parallel fiction corpus from GCEPC; the English
source is 387,479 words, and the Chinese translation is 404,450 characters.
Table 5.3 shows the basic information about the E-C parallel non-fiction corpus
from GCEPC, the English source is 285,964 words, and the Chinese translation is
287,659 characters.
Table 5.2 GCEPC-fiction GCEPC (E-C fiction)

Fiction EN-source CH-target
Table 5.3 GCEPC-non- GCEPC (E-C non-fiction)

fiction
Non-fiction EN-source CH-target
Table 5.4 MECPC

Text file EN CN
Types (distinct words) 8252 9679
Type/token ratio (TTR) 7.244824409 6.364078522
Standardised TTR 29.36901474 30.21378136
Mean word length (in characters) 3.727788925 1.723508716
The present research investigates the hybridity characteristics in different genres

and time periods, while Babel can reflect some tendency of translated Chinese in
the mixed genres and one specific time period, i.e., 2000s, while GCEPC can help
us explore the characteristics of translated Chinese in fiction and non-fiction genres,
but it cannot tell us the exact time periods.
In order to avoid these disadvantages of Babel and GCEPC, the present author
built an English-Chinese parallel corpus that he has named MECPC (Macau
English-Chinese Parallel Corpus) and it includes two sub-corpora: the first one
consists of English texts and their Chinese translations published during the
1930–1960s, English texts and their Chinese translations published around the
1970–2000s comprises the second sub-parallel corpus. Both parallel corpora
include materials from fiction and non-fiction, and the non-fiction in the present
research only includes one category, i.e., Academic.
The following tables show the sub-corpora of MECPC.
The E-C Parallel Sub-corpus consists of around 100 English texts and their
Chinese translations. All the English passages are from the academic domain,
which includes philosophy, religion, and politics; and the Chinese translations are
published within the time periods of the 1970–2000s. The statistical data of this
corpus are summarized and presented in Table 5.4.
The sub-parallel corpora are aligned at sentence level. They are also annotated
with part-of-speech (POS) taggers. The alignment and annotation facilitate the
Fig. 5.3 Screenshot of alignment
concordance of the linguistic features of translated Chinese and can also offer other
useful information for language investigation.
Figure 5.3 shows the screenshot of one sub-parallel corpus with annotation and
alignment:
5.2.2 Comparable Corpus
Comparable corpora can illuminate differences between translated and

non-translated texts. They can be used for a range of comparative purposes and
increase our knowledge of language-specific, typological and language features.
The research adopts two pre-existing Chinese monolingual comparable corpora
named LCMC and ZCTC in order to investigate the differences between native
Chinese and translated Chinese. LCMC (Lancaster Corpus of Mandarin Chinese)
and ZCTC (the ZJU Corpus of Translational Chinese) represent native and translated
Chinese respectively. These two Chinese corpora are each composed of one million
words in five hundred 2000-word text samples which are taken proportionally from
15 text categories published in China in the 1990s. LCMC was designed as a Chinese
match for the FLOB corpus of British English and the Frown corpus of American
English, and for use in cross-linguistic contrastive analysis of English and Chinese
(McEnery and Xiao 2004), while ZCTC was created as a translational counterpart of
LCMC with the explicit aim of studying features of translated Chinese (Xiao
et al. 2010; Xiao and Dai 2010). The samples from LCMC and ZCTC reflect the
features of native and translated Chinese in the 1990s. Table 5.5 illustrates the genres
covered in LCMC and ZCTC.
Table 5.5 The genres covered in LCMC and ZCTC

Code Genre Number of samples Proportion (%)
A Press reportage 44 8.8
B Press editorials 27 5.4
C Press reviews 17 3.4
D Religious writing 17 3.4
E Skills, trades and hobbies 38 7.6
F Popular lore 44 8.8
G Biographies and essays 77 15.4
H Miscellaneous (reports, official documents) 30 6
J Science (academic prose) 80 16
K General fiction 29 5.8
L Mystery and detective fiction 24 4.8
M Science fiction 6 1.2
N Adventure fiction 29 5.8
P Romantic fiction 29 5.8
R Humour 9 1.8
Total 500 100
LCMC and ZCTC are ideal tools for investigating the features of trans-
lated Chinese, for their balanced and representative characteristics. However,
they just can tell us the features within a specific time period, i.e. the 1990s.
In order to explore the tendencies of translated Chinese in different time periods,
the present researcher built two comparable corpora from GCEPC. The Chinese
texts taken from C-to-E and E-to-C subcorpora can form a comparable corpus
as illustrated in Fig. 5.4.
The Chinese original fiction texts and the Chinese translation fiction texts form
the first sub-comparable corpus; we have named it FictCom. The Chinese original
non-fiction texts and the Chinese translation non-fiction texts form the
second sub-comparable corpus, and we have named it NonFictCom.
Table 5.6 shows the basic information about the FictCom comparable corpus:
Table 5.7 illustrates the basic information about NonFictCom.
We hope to investigate the changes in language, so we have also built
two Chinese comparable corpora.
The comparable corpus built in the research has been named MCCC (Macau
Comparable Chinese Corpus) which consists of two sub-corpora, i.e. translated
Chinese and non-translated Chinese. The first comparable corpus is made up of
two parts; the first part is the translated Chinese texts in the first parallel corpus,
which were published during the 1930–1960s, and the second part is the
native Chinese texts published during the same time period. The second comparable
corpus consists of material published around the 1970–2000s. The two sub-corpora
can help us to investigate the language changes in translated Chinese.
Both the comparable corpora used materials drawn from fiction and non-fiction.
The non-fiction also comprises of the Academic domain.
GCEPC
C-E E-C
Chinese Original
(Fict.)
English Translation English Original
(Fict.) (Fict.)
Chinese Translation
(Fict.)
Chinese Original
(Non-Fict.)
English Translation English Original
(Non-Fict.) (Non-Fict.)
Chinese Translation
(Non-Fict.)
Fig. 5.4 GCEPC-comparable
Table 5.6 Fiction GCEPC-FictCom

comparable corpus
FictCom Original-C Translated-C
Table 5.7 Nonfiction GCEPC- NonFictCom

comparable corpus
NonFictCom Original Translated
All the samples of the Translated Academic Corpus (MCCC-ACADEMIC-TC)

are books translated from English. Most of the English books’ authors are well-
known in the academic world. The translated versions are translated by famous
translators and published by first class presses in China.
ACADEMIC-TC consists of 55 books and the Chinese words are 7,654,917
(used as a WordSmith wordlist; see further below), in which 920, 681 words come
from books published around the 1930–1960s, and 6,734,236 words are from books
published around the 1970–2000s. One thing should be mentioned here is that most
Table 5.8 MCCC-ACADEMIC-TC

MCCC-ACADEMIC-TC
Text file 1930–1960s 1970–2000s Whole
Tokens (running words) in text 922,757 6,792,596 7,715,353
Tokens used for word list 920,681 6,734,236 7,654,917
Types (distinct words) 22,892 67,856 71,489
% 12 88 100
Table 5.9 MCCC-ACADEMIC-NTC

MCCC-ACADEMIC-NTC
Tokens (running words) in text 1,821,845 3,516,716 5,338,561
Tokens used for word list 1,820,456 3,485,160 5,305,616
Types (distinct words) 47,987 61,969 83,139
% 34 66 100
of the translated Chinese versions have some passages written by the translators as
preface or introduction for the translation, and these passages were not included in
the corpus, for they are not translated Chinese. Another thing that should also be
pointed out is that the corpus samples for translated Chinese are whole books in
different fields, such as philosophy, history, religion, economics, politics, etc. and
these books are popular with the Chinese readers (most of them have been
reprinted). They can reflect the features of hybridity for translated Chinese.
All the books in English and their Chinese translations are listed in Appendix 1.
Table 5.8 shows the data for the corpus.
The Non-Translated Academic Corpus (MCCC-ACADEMIC-NTC) is
5,305,616 words from 44 books (12 books published around 1930–1960s, and
32 books published around 1970–2000s). Table 5.9 shows the basic information
about MCCC-ACADEMIC-NTC. It should be pointed out that the concordance
frequencies from this comparable corpus with different sizes must be tested with the
normalized frequency, not the raw frequency (see McEnery et al. 2006, p. 52).
5.2.3 Annotation of Corpora
All the corpora used in this research are annotated with POS tags.
The English samples are annotated by CLAWS2 (the Constituent Likelihood
Automatic Word-tagging System), designed by UCREL (University Centre for
Computer Corpus Research on Language at Lancaster University). The CLAWS
software is well-known for high precision POS tagging of English.
2
http://ucrel.lancs.ac.uk/claws/.
Fig. 5.5 Sample screenshot of CLAWS POS tagging
Fig. 5.6 ICTCLAS POS tagging
Figure 5.5 shows the POS tagging result of English with CLAWS.
The Chinese samples are annotated by the ICTCLAS3 (2008 version) which was
developed by the Institute of Computing Technology, Chinese Academy of Sci-
ence. ICTCLAS is the top software for Chinese POS tagging in China. Figure 5.6
shows the tagging results of a translated Chinese sample:
3
ICTCLAS(Institute of Computing Technology, Chinese Lexical Analysis System), http://ictclas.
nlpir.org/.
All the parallel and comparable corpora data (including the titles, authors/trans-
lators, published time, presses, numbers of words/tokens, etc.) are presented as
appendixes of this book.
5.3 Software Used in the Corpus Analysis Framework
The following section introduces the software used in this research. It includes
software called ‘Alignment’ that has been designed by myself and a fellow graduate
student (Song Yuchun from Shao Guan University, China) in order to build
English-Chinese parallel corpora, and other software for concordancing the cor-
pora, such as WordSmith, AntConc, Xaira, Collocate, ParaConc, etc.
5.3.1 Alignment
Automatic sentence alignment of English and Chinese is of critical importance for

building English-Chinese parallel corpora. The alignment quality has a direct
impact on the reliability of related research such as machine translation, bilingual
lexicography, contrastive language studies, translated language and so on. It has
been a longstanding goal of researchers in China to realize automatic sentence
alignment of English and Chinese parallel corpora with a high level of accuracy.
There exists some commercial software for sentence alignment between English
and Chinese, such as ParaConc, Abbyy Aligner, SDL Trados WinAlign, but each
exhibits some disadvantages for large E-C parallel corpora building; for example,
ParaConc cannot align Chinese and English if the Chinese text has not been
tokenized; Abbyy Aligner can align English and Chinese at sentence level, but its
aligned results cannot be saved as a text document, etc. Our software is user-
friendly and has its unique characteristics which will be introduced below.
As Dagan et al. point out, “Two languages are more informative than one” (Dagan
et al. 1991, p. 130), so parallel corpora can offer a large amount of useful information
for research. A large number of studies have been published which deal with the
alignment of European languages and some basic methods for alignment, such as
statistical alignment techniques (employing empirically justified heuristic
approaches) (Brown et al. 1991) and linguistic techniques (using morphosyntactic
information or exploiting similarities between languages) (Oakes and McEnery 2000).
English and Chinese are greatly different from each other, and aligning them at
sentential level automatically presents a considerable challenge. Different align-
ment algorithms have been discussed by McEnery et al. (2000); current techniques
for aligning English and Chinese include the following: sentence-length-based
methods, lexis-based approaches (Kit et al. 2004), statistical-approaches (Zhang
and Baigangxiuji 2005), a combination of sentence length and positioning infor-
mation (Li et al. 2006), etc.
5.3 Software Used in the Corpus Analysis Framework 65
Our software adopts the Hash algorithm for sentence alignment of English/
Chinese. We have designed an alignment program with the help of a fast fuzzy
inference system and back propagation (BP) neural network (Dai and Song 2014).
The alignment program is based on accumulative knowledge. The knowledge
database includes a substantial amount of data, such as English-Chinese and
Chinese-English dictionaries, dictionaries of synonyms and antonyms, idiom dic-
tionaries, etc. It is a substantial problem to manage the large size of data, and also a
great challenge to retrieve the information from the data quickly. We adopted some
Hash algorithms to deal with this problem. The HashMap can manage and use the
knowledge database effectively. Different Evaluation Functions were adopted and
they manage to analyse the feedback quickly and effectively, forming an Iterative
Algorithm (IA) which reduces the speed of alignment. The Hash Algorithms cut
down the time and improve the whole flowchart in the alignment process.
Computers have to follow human experience in aligning English and Chinese
sentences, and they must also learn from the aligned samples. We adopted a fast
fuzzy inference system which effectively supports the software in aligning different
sentences. So, like human beings, Alignment can deal with unexpected but similar
sentence patterns quickly.
All the algorithms for alignment are supported by the BP neural network which
combines online and offline learning algorithms. The ANN (Artificial Neural
Network) recognizer can take advantage of online and offline learning algorithms,
and form the Fusion Algorithm (FA) which can help the software output the aligned
results. The system is illustrated in Fig. 5.7.
Fig. 5.7 Alignment system

Fig. 5.8 Aligned results
The Alignment program greatly facilitates building English-Chinese parallel

corpora. Its high precision of alignment result makes the building of large E-C
parallel corpora convenient and trouble-saving (the accuracy rate of the tool can
reach 95.7 % for the Non-fictional texts according to the pilot experiment. See Dai
and Song 2014). It is also easy to edit the alignment result manually if some errors
appear in the automatic analysis.
Figure 5.8 presents a screenshot of the aligned result using this program.
5.3.2 Xaira
Xaira (XML Aware Indexing and Retrieval Architecture) was designed by

Lou Burnard and Tony Todd and is distributed free of charge (Xiao 2006).
This study adopts Xaira (the version 1.16) for concordancing language items in
Chinese. Xaira consists of the following components: an Index Toolkit, a server,
and a Client program. The comparable corpora used in this research, namely LCMC
and ZCTC are in XML format and can be retrieved by the Xaira Client Program.
Figure 5.9 shows the screenshot of the concordancing results of aspect markers in
LCMC with Xaira.
5.3 Software Used in the Corpus Analysis Framework 67
Fig. 5.9 Concordancing results of aspect markers in LCMC
5.3.3 WordSmith Tools
WordSmith Tools were designed by Mike Scott and released by Oxford University
Press. It is an integrated suite of programs that process monolingual corpora and
help us to look at how words behave in texts. It consists of the following programs,
i.e., WordList, Concord and KeyWord. The WordList tool can make a list of all the
words or word-clusters in a text, set out in alphabetical or frequency order. The
concordancer, Concord, can present any word or phrase in context and can show
“what sort of company it keeps” (Scott 2010, p. 2). KeyWords can “find the key
words in a text” (i.e. those words that occur more or less frequently than normal)
with the help of reference corpora (ibid.).
5.3.4 ParaConc
The present research also adopts ParaConc (Version1.0, Build 269) for concord-
ancing the English-Chinese parallel corpus. ParacConc was a commercial software4
and is designed by Dr. Michael Barlow. It can concordance two to four languages at
a time. Figure 5.10 shows that ParaConc can load two to four parallel texts.
The ‘Search engine’ of ParaConc can carry out different searches, such as the
simple text search, regular expression search, tag search, and parallel search. The
4
The demo version can present 150 lines of concordancing results which cannot be saved for
reanalysis. It can be retrieved from the website: http://www.paraconc.com/demo.html.
Fig. 5.10 Loading corpus

files for ParaConc
‘Translations tool’ of ParaConc can search for potential translations in the results
window. The ‘Hot Words feature’ suggests possible translations and collocates.
ParaConc can help researchers to analyse the aligned parallel texts in different
languages and find out the tendencies or rules from the translations, and it can be
used in contrastive analyses, language learning, translation studies, and translator
training.
5.4 Conclusions
This chapter has offered the theoretical considerations on the empirical approach to
language research and translation studies which is different from rational methods.
Some basic characteristics of the empirical method were described and discussed,
alongside related quantitative research methods.
It has also introduced the corpora used in the present research which is specifi-
cally intended to investigate the features of translated Chinese. The corpora frame-
work consists of parallel and comparable corpora, general and specialized corpora,
synchronic and diachronic corpora. All the corpora, including the self-built ones,
were introduced in the chapter.
All the corpora are annotated with POS tags, and the English-Chinese parallel
corpora are aligned at sentence level with self-designed software which was also
introduced briefly in the chapter. Other software used for data-searching and
analysis were also introduced here, such as Xaira, WordSmith and ParaConc, etc.
References 69
The methodology and corpus design are fundamental to the research project,
and offer a context for the following chapters, which report and discuss the
actual research.
References
Bausell, R.B. 1986. A practical guide to conducting empirical research. New York: Harper &
Row Publishers, Inc.
Black, T.R. 1999. Doing quantitative research in the social sciences: An integrated approach to
research design, measurement and statistics. London: SAGE Publications.
Brown, P.F., J.C. Lai, and R.L. Mercer. 1991. Aligning sentences in parallel corpora. Proceedings
of the 29th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics, 169–176. Berkeley:
ACL.
Dagan, I., A. Itai, and U. Schwall. 1991. Two languages are more informative than one.
In Proceedings of the 29th annual meeting of the ACL, 130–137.
Dai, G., and R. Xiao. 2011. Yiwen zhong Yuanyu Touguo Xiaoying Yanjiu: Jiyu Yuliaoku de
Yingyihan Beidongju Yanjiu (‘Source language shining through’ in translational language:
A corpus-based study of Chinese translation of English passives). Translation Quarterly (62):
85–107. [戴光荣,肖忠华. (2011). 译文中 “源语透过效应”研究——基于语料库的英译汉被
动句研究. hh翻译季刊ii, (62), 85–107.]
Dai, G., and Y. Song. 2014. Haxi Suanfa yu yuyi yingshe zai yuliaoku duiqi zhong de yunyong
(Applications of hash algorithms and semantic mapping in C-E sentential alignment). Journal
of Fujian University of Technology 12(5): 454–459. [戴光荣,宋玉春. (2014). 哈希算法与语
义映射在语料库对齐中的运用. hh福建工程学院学报ii,12, (5): 454–459.]
Granger, S. 2003/2007. The corpus approach: A common way forward for contrastive linguistics
and translation studies. In Corpus-based approaches to contrastive linguistics and trans-
lation studies, ed. S. Granger, J. Lerot, and S. Petch-Tyson, 17–29. Beijing: Foreign Language
Teaching and Research Press.
Halliday, M.A.K. 2005. Computational and Quantitative Studies. In Collected works of
M. A. K. Halliday, ed. Jonathan Webster, Vol. 6. London: Continuum.
Kit, C., J.J. Webster, K.K. Sin, H. Pan, and H. Li. 2004. Clause alignment for bilingual HK
legal texts: A lexical based approach. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 9(1): 29–51.
Li, W., T. Liu, Y. Zhang, and S. Li. 2006. Jiyu Changdu he Weizhi Xinxi de Shuangyu Juzi Duiqi
Fangfa (Bilingual sentence alignment method based on sentence length and location information).
Journal of Harbin Institute of Technology 38(5): 689–692. [李维刚,刘挺,张宇,李生. (2006). 基
于长度和位置信息的双语句子对齐方法. hh哈尔滨工业大学学报ii, 38(5), 689–692.]
McEnery, T., and A. Wilson. 2001. Corpus linguistics: An introduction, 2nd ed. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press.
McEnery, T., and Z. Xiao. 2004, May 24–30. The Lancaster corpus of Mandarin Chinese:
A corpus for monolingual and contrastive language study. Paper presented at the fourth inter-
national conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC) 2004, Lisbon.
McEnery, T., S. Piao, and X. Xin. 2000. Parallel alignment in English and Chinese.
In Multilingual corpora in teaching and research, ed. S.P. Botley, A.M. McEnery, and
A. Wilson, 177–191. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Neumann, S., and S. Hansen-Schirra. 2012. Corpus methodology and design. In Cross-linguistic
corpora for the study of translations: Insights from the language pair English-German,
Oakes, M., and T. McEnery. 2000. Bilingual text alignment: An overview. In Multilingual corpora in
teaching and research, ed. S.P. Botley, A.M. McEnery, and A. Wilson, 1–37. Amsterdam:
Rodopi.
Popper, K. 1959/2002. The logic of scientific discovery. London: Routledge Classics.
Scott, M. 2010. WordSmith tools (version 5.0). Liverpool: Lexical Analysis Software Ltd.
Sumser, J. 2001. A guide to empirical research in communication: Rules for looking. London:
Sage Publications, Inc.
Wang, K. 2004. Shuangyu Duiyingyuliaoku Yanzhi yu Yingyong (Construction and application of
E-C parallel corpus). Beijing: Waiyu Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu Chubanshe. [王克非. (2004). hh双语
Xiao, R. 2006. REVIEW: Xaira – An XML aware indexing and retrieval architecture.
Corpora 1(1): 99–103.
Xiao, Z., and G. Dai. 2010. Xunqiu Disanyuma: Jiyu Hanyu Yiwenyuliaoku de Fanyi Gongxing
and Research) 42(1): 52–58. [肖忠华,戴光荣. (2010). 寻求”第三语码”:基于汉语译文语料
Xiao, R., L. He, and M. Yue. 2010. Using the ZJU corpus of translational Chinese in
translation studies. In Using corpora in contrastive and translation studies, ed. R. Xiao,
182–214. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Zhang, Y., and Baigangxiuji. 2005. Jiyu Changdu de Kuozhan Fangfa de Hanying Juzi Duiqi
(Aligning sentences in Chinese-English corpora with extended length-based approach).
Journal of Chinese Information Processing 19(5): 31–37. [张艳, 柏冈秀纪. (2005). 基于长度
的扩展方法的汉英句子对齐. hh中文信息学报ii, 19(5), 31–37.]
Chapter 6
Native and Translated Chinese: Normality
and Hybridity
Abstract This chapter introduces the linguistic norms of native Chinese, such as
non-inflectional morphology, aspect prominent, monosyllabism, paratactic syntax,
etc. All these norms can be useful for differentiating translated Chinese from
the non-translated Chinese. It presents some linguistic features which will be the
focuses in the exploration, and also explores the framework for describing the
hybridity features in translated Chinese.
6.1 Introduction
Translated Chinese and native, or non-translated, Chinese are different from

each other in many respects. The formal differentiation of translated Chinese from
native Chinese requires consideration of language standards or linguistic norms
which will be discussed in the following sections of the present chapter.
The differences between native and translated Chinese are presented by way of a
list of hybridity characteristics found in translated Chinese.
6.2 Linguistic Norms
Linguistic norms are developed and diffused in various speech communities as a

result of social pressures to homogenize language standards. Different languages/
dialects have their specific, but dynamic linguistic norms. The linguistic norms
may have no regulations in written forms, but they can be accepted or followed by
most of the people speaking the same language or dialect (Hu 1991, 2003).
Labov (1991) discusses the fact that the “speech community is not defined by
any marked agreement in the use of language elements, so much as by participation
in a set of shared norms” (Labov 1991, pp. 120–121). Labov not only ‘defines the
speech community as a group that shares a certain orientation to a set of norms’, and
‘puts forward a model for studying language norms empirically’, but also points out

DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-0742-2_6
72 6 Native and Translated Chinese: Normality and Hybridity
that ‘norms can be observed both in language use and in evaluations considering
language’ (Kauhanen 2006, pp. 36–38).
Aitchison (2001) observes that all languages change by norm deviation and
norm break, and indicates that the stimuli for linguistic norm changes are complex
and based upon both internal and external linguistic preconditions. Other linguistic
changes are due to social conditions such as fashion, foreign influence, and
social need (Aitchison 2001).
Social aspects for linguistic changes differ from societies and time periods, and
Aitchison points out that the social conditions only work if the language is ready for
a specific change, “they simply make use of inherent tendencies which reside in the
physical and mental make-up of human beings” (Aitchison 2001, p. 256). Also, the
causes for linguistic changes can emanate from different levels. The diffusion of
norm deviation reflects changes in society, but norm deviation initiates processes of
change only when they are connected with prestige, that is to say, “they are markers
of group membership, and people outside the group want, consciously or sub-
consciously, to belong” to the group (Aitchison 2001, p. 83).
Roksvold (2010) divides the linguistic norms into semantic, phonological, gram-
matical, stylistic, and pragmatic ones, and these norms are always changing as time
goes by. The linguistic norms prescribe ways of being and acting together in a
language community. They are conventional in the sense that they are not given by
nature, but instead are created by the people in a society (Roksvold 2010):
Vital changes spread, although the process may proceed slowly. Some norm changes may
need hundreds of years to become a new norm, which explains why people get so angry
about observed norm changes. They do not see these changes as being part of a long-term
process made necessary by the linguistic system itself. Some of the grammatical deviations
observed by the conservative readers who complain about what they call the decay of
newspaper language are part of this process as well (Roksvold 2010, pp. 106–107).
These grammatical deviations can happen commonly to the translated texts, for
“translation [is] an important venue of influence in language contact” (Steiner 2008,
p. 320), and translation-induced language change is a key approach to language
changes. Translated language can reflect the traces of all effects during the whole
translation process, and the translated texts become an important venue of language
variations. The variations consist of the hybrid features of the translated language,
and they can play an important role in understanding the nature of translation,
translation norms and the language changes. In order to describe the hybridity
characteristics of translated Chinese, we consider the linguistic norms of native
Chinese for comparison. The next section will introduce some key points of the
native Chinese language “normality”.
6.3 Normality of Native Chinese Language 73
6.3 Normality of Native Chinese Language
Modern written Chinese has its own linguistic norms, but there exists only rarely
research on the topic of the normality of native Chinese. According to Yu (2002),
Chinese has its own typical linguistic patterns, which has been termed “normality”
or ‘normalcy’.
Normality is not a set of rules, but a native speaker’s intuition about the general patterns of
the language he/she speaks, an intuition that cannot be precisely measured or defined.
However, we can assume its presence in a certain amount of original Chinese texts,
because, compared with translated Chinese texts, the former is closer to the normality
(Yu 2002, p.151; cited in Wang and Qin 2010, p. 165).
The linguistic norms of one specific language are different from other languages.
Contrastive language studies make the linguistic norms more understandable with
the comparisons between one language with the other. In fact, as we have seen
much research on the Chinese language has been based on the comparison between
Chinese and European languages, especially English. Here we just mention some
key books in Chinese language research, such as the first book on Chinese linguistic
norms named ‘马氏文通’ (Mǎshı̀ Wéntōng: The Chinese Grammar, 1898) by Ma
Jianzhong (Ma 1983/1998), which constructed the grammatical system of Chinese
language by imitating Western grammar and contributed greatly to the theoretical
development of Chinese language study. Other research on Chinese language
includes Li Jinxi’s ‘新著国语文法’ (Xı̄nzhuGuoyǔ Wénfǎ: A New Grammar of
the Chinese National Language, first published in 1924, see Li and Liu 2007),
which is regarded as “not only the first pioneering work of its kind, but also the only
grammar that has been put to the test of language teaching and Chinese information
processing by computers, and proved to be useful and workable” (Hu 2002, p. 100).
L€u Shuxiang’s ‘中国文法要略’ (Zhōngguo wénfǎ yaoluè: Essentials of Chinese
Grammar, first published in 1943, see L€u 1982), and two books by Wang Li are
discussed in Sect. 4.3.2, Chap. 4.
All these researchers are representatives of the early native Chinese-speaking
scholars (Lian 1993, p. 3), and the Chinese linguistic norms presented in these
books offered a wealth of descriptions of Chinese usage at different times. The
current research on Chinese language, such as Sun (2006), Zhang (2010), etc. shows
that the norms of Chinese language have changed considerably since the first
grammar book in 1898 by Ma Jianzhong.
All the linguistic norms demonstrate specific linguistic features in specific time
periods, while the specific linguistic features can reflect the cultural traditions of the
people. The specific linguistic features of Chinese language have attracted a lot of
interest from the Western scholars. For example, ‘Joseph Needham: Science and
Civilisation in China Vol VII.1: Language and Logic’ by Christoph Harbsmeier
discusses the Chinese linguistic features as follows:
. . .the Chinese are never put to that irksome vexation of searching out a radix for the
derivation of any of their words, as generally all other Nations are, but the radix is the word
and the word is the radix. . ..Besides they are not troubled with variety of Declensions,
Conjugations, Numbers, Genders, Moods, Tenses and the like grammatical niceties, but are
absolutely free from all such perplexing accidents, having no other Rules in use than what
the light of nature has dictated unto them; whereby their language is plain, easie and simple
as NATURAL speech ought to be (Harbsmeier 1998, p. 13).
All the linguistic features listed in Harbsmeier (1998) are the language pheno-
mena of classic/old Chinese, and modern written Chinese has changed greatly over
time in part owing to contact with other languages, such as English, French, Greek,
and Japanese. All the contact effects have resulted in language variation from
earlier linguistic norms, and this variation can be seen and described in relation to
the common linguistic norms.
Halliday and McDonald (2004) describe Modern Chinese within the framework
of systemic functional grammar and offer an brief metafunctional profile of Chinese
grammar. They argue that “Chinese has never been a borrowing language, it has
always been a lending one: three major languages on or near its borders, namely
Korean, Japanese, and Vietnamese, borrowed extensively from Chinese,. . .espe-
cially around the time of the Tang dynasty (sixth to tenth centuries), including their
earliest writing systems” (Halliday and McDonald 2004, p. 308). This observation
reflects the historical situation of the Chinese language exerting some influence on
other languages, but these influences will not be included in the present research.
Lian (1993) lists some dichotomies for describing the difference between
English and Chinese, such as synthetic vs. analytic, compact vs. diffusive, hypo-
tactic vs. paratactic, complex vs. simplex, impersonal vs. personal, passive
vs. active, static vs. dynamic, abstract vs. concrete, indirect vs. direct, substitutive
vs. reiterative (Lian 1993). Lian’s dichotomous divisions between Chinese and
English languages reflect some opinions of language contrastive studies in China,
but should be investigated with the help of a large size corpus data, not just by the
individual introspection.
The section will list some linguistic norms according to several authorities in
Chinese language studies, such as Chao (1968), Li and Thompson (1981), Packard
(1997, 2000/2004), Chen (1999), Ross and Ma (2006), Sun (2006), L€u (1999),
Zhang (2010) and Liu (2010), etc. All the linguistic norms listed here will function
as standard points of reference for a comparison between native Chinese and
translated Chinese in the following chapters.
6.3.1 Non-inflectional Language
Chinese is regarded as prototypical of the ‘isolating’ language type (contrasting

with ‘agglutinative’ and ‘inflexional’), and Chinese is quite striking in its general
lack of complexity in word formation and it is generally true that each word consists
of just one morpheme and cannot be further analysed into component parts (Li and
Thompson 1981, p. 11).
In grammar, inflection is the modification of a word to express different gram-
matical categories such as tense, mood, voice, aspect, person, number, gender, case,
6.3 Normality of Native Chinese Language 75
degree of comparison and part of speech. English is an inflectional language, and

the “excessive frequency of these forms gives them great morphological weight”
(cited in Lian 1993, p. 4), while Chinese is a non-inflectional language, so Chinese
needs some word-formational devices to form new words or express various
grammatical meanings. Chinese words do not “vary morphologically, nor is there
any indication of word class in their phonological shape. Word classes are however
clearly defined by syntactic function” (Halliday and McDonald 2004, p. 318).
Chinese words generally comprise one or two monosyllabic written characters
(字zı̀), each of which can also stand alone as an unbound morpheme. Chinese word
components include the following four types: free and bound morpheme, functional
(grammatical) and content (lexical) morpheme (cf. Packard 2000). Since mor-
phemes are monosyllabic in the Chinese languages, Chinese is quite resistant to
inflectional changes; instead, Chinese uses lexical means for achieving covert
inflectional transparency. The combination of four types of morphemes can offer
Chinese the following word types: [+free, +function], [+free, function], [free,
+function], and [free, function] (see Packard 2000, p. 67). So, compounding is
the main word formation approach of Chinese language.
6.3.2 Aspect Language without Grammatical Category

of Tense
“Aspects are different ways of viewing the internal temporal constituency of a

situation” (Comrie 1976, p. 3), while “tense is grammaticalised expression of
location in time” (Comrie 1985, p. 9). Aspect is an “important linguistic category
which relates to the study of linguistic devices that enable a speaker to direct the
hearer’s attention to the temporality of a situation, either intrinsic or viewed from a
certain perspective” (Xiao and McEnery 2004, p. 1).
Chinese is a language which does not have the grammatical category of tense,
for the concept of tense can be lexicalized, i.e. indicated by content words like
adverbs of time, while aspectual meaning can be conveyed systematically by aspect
markers.
Wang (1985) discusses seven types of aspect, i.e., general aspect, progressive
aspect, perfective aspect, imperfective aspect of recent past, ingressive aspect,
continuative aspect, and transitory aspect (Wang 1985, pp. 216–225; cited in Zuo
2012, pp. 22–23). Gao (1986) divides aspect into six types, namely progressive or
durative aspect, accomplished or perfective aspect, resultative aspect, momentary
aspect, and intensive aspect (Gao 1986, pp. 189–199; cited in Zuo 2012, p. 23).
Meanwhile, Li and Thompson (1981) explore four types of aspects, namely per-
fective, imperfective, experiential and delimitative (Li and Thompson 1981,
p. 185–236). The most frequently used aspect markers are ‘-le’ (了perfective aspect
marker), ‘-guo’ (过experiential aspect marker), ‘-zhe’ (着durative aspect marker),
etc. (Norman 1988; Zuo 2012; Zuo and Dai 2013).
6.3.3 Monosyllabic Myth
An English word consists of letters, while a Chinese word (词cı́) consists of

character (s) (字zı̀), and “the most striking characteristic of the Chinese lexicon is
the almost perfect correspondence between the syllable and the written character”
(Arcodia 2007, p. 81). According to some representative studies, there is a “mono-
syllabic myth” about Chinese. The monosyllabic myth was first proposed by
Kennedy (1951). According to Kennedy (1951), there is an occidental assumption
that “Chinese speak wholly in monosyllables” (Kennedy 1951, p.161), and Chao
(1968) argues that Chinese is monosyllabic, and states that “the so-called ‘mono-
syllabic myth’ is in fact one of the truest myths in Chinese mythology” (Chao 1968,
p. 139).
Li (1973) also points out that Chinese, as a member language of the Sino-Tibetan
family, has a monosyllabic characteristics:
One of the characteristics of this family is the tendency toward monosyllabism. By
monosyllabism we do not mean that all the words in these languages consist of single
syllables, but that a single syllable is an important phonological unit and often is a
morphemic unit, the structure of which is rigidly determined by the phonological rules of
the language, and serves as the basis for the formation of words, phrases, and sentences
(Li 1973, p. 2).
As a monosyllabic language, every syllable in Chinese has a meaning. The vast

majority of words are one syllable in length. In Chinese, a word can be equated with
a single ‘character’ in the writing system, and one of the most remarkable charac-
teristics about Chinese is that “virtually all native Mandarin morphemes
(i.e. morphemes that are not borrowed from a foreign language) are of the
form. . ., namely, containing just one syllable. The uniqueness of this characteristic
is better understood when we look at languages such as English where polysyllabic
morphemes abound” (Lin 2001, p. 52). In this sense, “Chinese can be claimed to be
rigidly monosyllabic” (Li and Thompson 1981, p. 13). In modern Chinese, most
words used in discourse are monosyllabic and disyllabic, but “monosyllabic words
are most frequently used” (L€u 1999, p. 10; translated by Wang and Qin 2010,
p. 167–168).
Nevertheless, the characterisation of Chinese as monosyllabic has been
criticised. DeFrancis (1984) attempts to refute six so-called “myths” about Chinese
characters, one of which is monosyllabism (DeFrancis 1984, pp. 176–188). Gao
(2009) argues that Chinese is monosyllabic and dissyllabic (Gao 2009, p. 228),
Chen (1999) suggests that there is a much larger proportion of di- and multisyllabic
words in modern Chinese (Chen 1999, p. 68), and other researchers also think that
the written Chinese has the disyllable prevalence (Kao 1994; Dong 2002, 2011;
Diao 2006; etc.).
The monosyllable prevalence will be investigated in the next section of the
chapter, on basis of the suite of corpora adopted in the present research.
6.4 Differences between Native and Translated Chinese 77
6.3.4 Paratactic Organization Strategy and Depending

on Word Order
Comparative studies between modern English and Chinese languages reveal to us

that modern English generally organizes its sentence and discourse by hypotaxis,
while modern Chinese adopts parataxis. Overt cohesion in English is very impor-
tant and often obligatory, while covert coherence is a notable characteristic of
Chinese (Lian 1993).
As an isolating language, Chinese organizes the sentences and discourses
depending on the ‘semantic or logical comprehension’ and word order, not like
agglutinative or inflexional languages which depend on the ‘connectives in the
juxtaposition of syntactic units’ (Tse 2010).
6.3.5 “Verby” Language and Other Developed Grammatical

Norms of Chinese
According to Liu (2010), Chinese is a “verby” language, while English is a “nouny”

language. Liu (2010) draws his conclusion based on a contrastive study between
Chinese and English at levels of speech acts, sentences, subordinate clauses,
phrases, word class shift and on a comparison of first language acquisition from a
typological perspective. Chinese and English respectively exemplify two linguistic
types that are in sharp contrast in terms of grammatical prominence of word classes.
All the languages of the world develop over time, and so Chinese has never
ceased to develop and change over its long history. Globalization of communication
and language contact are making Chinese more complicated than ever. According
to Chen (1999), newly developed grammatical norms in modern written Chinese
since the 1910s include features of non-Northern Mandarin dialects, and the
Europeanization of grammar (see Chap. 4 above).
All the linguistic norms discussed in the present section will be investigated in
the following chapters.
6.4 Differences between Native and Translated Chinese
The linguistic norms discussed in the preceding section tell us that Chinese is
monosyllabic and English is multisyllabic. One possible impact of lexical contact
between English and Chinese, then is clearly the rise of disyllabic and multisyllabic
words in Chinese. This possibility raises some questions that corpus-based research
can address: Is there any difference between native Chinese and translated Chinese
in word length? Does translated Chinese have a greater tendency towards disyllabic
and multisyllabic words?
6.4.1 Dissyllablic Prevalence in Both Translated and Native

Chinese
The ICTCLAS 2008 software can split the Chinese words into their constituent
syllables, and WordSmith tools can compute the word length of Chinese. For
English and many other alphabetic languages, word length is a way of measuring
lexical specificity and diversity. For Chinese, however, word length can reflect
idiomaticity of language use (Wang and Qin 2010).
To begin to address these questions, we can analyse the parallel corpus of
English source texts and their Chinese translations. Table 6.1 presents some infor-
mation about the Babel English-Chinese parallel corpus. The mean word length for
English is about 4 letters, while for Chinese it is about 1.6 characters (字 zı̀).
Table 6.2 shows the information about the corpus of GCEPC-Fiction. The mean
word length of English items is again about 4.2 letters, while translated Chinese is
about 1.4 characters.
Table 6.3 shows the information about the corpus of GCEPC Non-Fiction. Here
the mean word length of English is about 4.8 letters, while translated Chinese is
about 1.6 characters.
Tables 6.2 and 6.3 also indicate some differences: the mean word length of the
fictional original English texts (4.24 letters) is shorter than that in non-fictional
original English texts (4.81 letters), and the mean word length of non-fictional
translated Chinese (1.63 characters) is longer than that of the fictional translated
Chinese (1.44 characters).
We now turn to the consideration of original and translated Chinese. Table 6.4
shows the information about the corpus of GCEPC-FictCom. The mean word
length of the original Chinese is about 1.36 characters, while translated Chinese
is about 1.44 characters.
Table 6.5 shows the information about the corpus of GCEPC Non-FictCom. The
mean word length of the original Chinese is about 1.73 characters, while translated
Chinese is about 1.63 characters.
Table 6.1 Basic data about the Babel corpus

Babel (E-C parallel corpus)
Text file en cn
Mean word length (letters/characters) 4.1665521 1.6283795
1 Letter/character 35244 114715
2 Letters/characters 35193 111689
Table 6.2 GCEPC-fiction (E-C)

GCEPC fiction
Text file EN-source CH-target
Table 6.3 GCEPC non-fiction (E-C)

GCEPC non-fiction
Text file EN-source CH-target
Table 6.6 shows the information about the corpus of MCCC-ACADEMIC-TC. It

illustrates that mean word length in the translated Chinese of 1930–1960s is about
1.57 characters, while translated Chinese of 1970–2000s is about 1.64 characters.
Table 6.7 shows the information about the corpus of MCCC-ACADEMIC-NTC.
It illustrates that the mean word length in the original Chinese of the 1930–1960s is
about 1.34 characters, while translated Chinese of the 1970–2000s is about 1.55
characters. The results overall suggest that the original Chinese has an increasing
dissyllabic tendency over time.
Tables 6.6 and 6.7 show similar tendencies in academic translated Chinese and
non-translated Chinese: the mean word length of academic translated Chinese in the
1930–1960s is shorter than that in the 1970–2000s, and the mean word length of
academic non-translated Chinese in the 1930–1960s is shorter than that in the
1970–2000s. Both the translated and non-translated Chinese of the academic
genre show a dissyllabic tendency as time goes on.
We can compare these findings with the results of analysis of the translated and
native Chinese corpus Table 6.8 shows the basic difference in word length between
LCMC and ZCTC:
Table 6.4 GCEPC-FictCom

GCEPC-FictCom
Text file CN-original CN-translated
Table 6.5 GCEPC-NonFictCom

GCEPC- NonFictCom
Text file CN-original CN-translated
Table 6.6 MCCC-ACADEMIC-TC

MCCC-ACADEMIC-TC
Type/token ratio (TTR) 2.486420393 1.007627249 0.9338965
Standardised TTR 43.45527649 44.32187271 44.21822
Mean word length (letters/characters) 1.567143917 1.641530275 1.632633686
1 Letter/character 453783 3045954 3499737
2 Letters/characters 434792 3373201 3807993
Table 6.8 and Fig. 6.1 show the distribution of words of various lengths in
LCMC and ZCTC. Monosyllabic and disyllabic words consist of the largest
proportion in LCMC and ZCTC (see Figs. 6.2 and 6.3):
All the data from the corpora show the tendency towards increasing disyllable
prevalence in native and translated Chinese.
Table 6.7 MCCC-ACADEMIC-NTC

MCCC-ACADEMIC-NTC
Type/token ratio (TTR) 2.635987997 1.778081894 1.566999912
Standardised TTR 45.56721497 45.36850739 45.43635559
Mean word length (letters/characters) 1.339377403 1.545675516 1.475273967
1 Letter/character 1264249 1833872 3098121
Table 6.8 LCMC vs. ZCTC

LCMC VS. ZCTC
Text file LCMC ZCTC
1 Letter/character 433,554 429,529
2 Letters/characters 378,552 397,304
6+ Letters/characters 600 1320
The following section will investigate the difference between native and trans-
lated Chinese using the two monolingual Chinese comparable corpora, i.e., LCMC
and ZCTC. All the results present data in relation to the first part of the corpus
analysis framework illustrated in Fig. 6.4 in the following Sect. 6.5 of this chapter.
6.4.2 A Comparison of Linguistic Features in Translated

and Native Chinese
Dai (2013) investigated the language features presented in a native Chinese corpus
(LCMC) and a translated Chinese corpus (ZCTC). Table 6.9 summarises the
differences in linguistic features between the two corpora.
The log-likelihood (LL) test has been carried out to test the statistical signifi-
cance of the difference between LCMC and ZCTC. Table 6.9 illustrates two types
of linguistic features in LCMC and ZCTC: Type I (Frequency: LCMC > ZCTC),
and Type II (Frequency: LCMC < ZCTC). All the linguistic features listed in the
table include phonetic, lexical, grammatical and discourse levels.
500,000
450,000
400,000
350,000
300,000
250,000 LCMC
200,000
ZCTC
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
1 syllable 2 syllables 3 syllables 4 syllables 5 syllables 6+
syllables
Fig. 6.1 Word length in LCMC and ZCTC
LCMC
1 syllable
2 syllables
3 syllables
4 syllables
5 syllables
6+ syllables
Fig. 6.2 Proportions of different word lengths in LCMC
ZCTC
1 syllable
2 syllables
3 syllables
4 syllables
5 syllables
6+ syllables
Fig. 6.3 Proportions of different word lengths in ZCTC

Hybridity in Translated Chinese--Framework
Identifying Difference between TC & NTC
Frequency & Statistical Significance
(1)
High Sign. Level Low Sign. Level
Synchronic
Comparable
Corpora Collocations, Semantic
Stop Here
Testing Preference, etc.
Category and
Tendency
Analyses
(2) Parallel Corpora Testing (3) Diachronic Comparable Corpora Testing
(4) Conclusions
Fig. 6.4 Framework for describing the hybridity features in TC
The first type shows that the frequency of linguistic features in LCMC is lower
than that in ZCTC, while the second type shows the frequency of linguistic features
in LCMC is higher than that in ZCTC. The first type suggests that some features in
translated Chinese are source language oriented, such as transliterated foreign/place
names, character string (e.g. WHO, Project D, IP, PC etc.), suffixes, conjunctions,
etc. These linguistic features are used frequently in English source texts and it seems
that their substantial presence influences the translated Chinese. Further linguistic
features will be explored in the following chapters (Chaps. 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11).
Meanwhile, the second type suggests that some features in translated Chinese
are target language oriented, such as the aspect markers zhe/uzhe(着), auxiliary le/
ule (了). In Chinese, the aspectual meanings are conveyed systematically by aspect
markers, i.e., the grammaticalized function words. As such, Chinese is exclusively
an aspect language (see the discussion in Sect. 6.2). So we can conclude that the
translated Chinese is target language oriented in these linguistic features.
Table 6.9 Linguistic features in LCMC & ZCTC and statistical data
LCMC ZCTC LL value Sig.
No Type I Frequency: LCMC < ZCTC
1 Transliterated foreign name (nrf) 1697 10873 7529.56 0.000
2 Transliterated place name (nsf) 2383 7954 3200.68 0.000
3 Character string (x) 2705 10482 4943.96 0.000
4 Suffix (k) 1797 2113 27.46 0.000
5 Verb shi (vshi) 13016 13954 38.37 0.000
6 Pro-verb (vx) 1010 1243 25.53 0.000
7 Noun modifying formulaic expression (bl) 356 477 18.36 0.000
8 Pronoun (r) 2687 3326 71.84 0.000
9 Personal pronoun (rr) 25775 39855 3127.52 0.000
10 Deictic pronoun (rz) 8075 11682 683.58 0.000
11 Place pronoun (rzs) 1341 1803 70.88 0.000
12 Verbal pronoun (rzv) 7731 9536 199.78 0.000
13 Verbal interrogative pronoun (ryv) 1273 1465 14.63 0.000
14 Pronoun morpheme (rg) 79 257 100.34 0.000
15 Numeral (m) 29929 30381 6.56 0.010
16 Numeral-classifier (mq) 4647 5868 149.36 0.000
17 Preposition (p) 34376 38674 278.89 0.000
18 Preposition bei (pbei) 1273 1720 69.66 0.000
19 Conjunction (c) 12383 17045 769.31 0.000
20 Coordinating conjunction (cc) 12509 14130 108.45 0.000
21 Auxiliary de (ude1) 51387 62773 1205.34 0.000
22 Auxiliary suo (usuo) 1107 1814 177.01 0.000
23 Auxiliary yiyang (uyy) 564 759 30 0.000
24 Auxiliary laijiang (uls) 230 519 116.16 0.000
25 Full or half-length dash (wp) 1182 1629 63.13 0.000
26 End punctuation (ew) 42551 45395 109.44 0.000
Type II Frequency:LCMC > ZCTC
27 Comma (wd) 75865 58219 2226.57 0.000
28 Chinese back-sloping comma (wn) 12490 5573 2677.18 0.000
29 Auxiliary zhi (uzhi) 1169 819 68.84 0.000
30 Auxiliary lian (ulian) 230 142 20.5 0.000
31 Particle (y) 6390 5455 92.59 0.000
32 Onomatopoeia (o) 348 258 12.89 0.000
33 Auxiliary zhe (uzhe) 3405 2846 61.29 0.000
34 Auxiliary le (ule) 9054 8749 12.59 0.000
35 Classifier (q) 16695 16157 5.93 0.015
36 Verbal classifier (qv) 2898 2607 13.73 0.000
(p <0.05 is considered significant)
6.5 Hybridity in TC: Framework and Features for Investigation 85
The present discussion has shown that hybridity features in translated Chinese
can be investigated up to a point by using general Chinese comparable corpora.
However, the general corpora can only illustrate the general tendency to use
hybridity features in Chinese. The specialized Chinese corpora may present differ-
ent hybridity features. We turn now to a detailed exploration of the hybridity
features in translated Chinese in two specific corpora (Academic and Fiction).
The comparable and parallel corpora will help us to describe the hybridity features
at multiple linguistic levels, that is, phonetic, lexical, syntactic and discursive.
The following section presents the framework for investigating these hybridity
features in translated Chinese.
6.5 Hybridity in TC: Framework and Features

for Investigation
The section describes the framework for the investigation of hybrid features in
translated Chinese (TC). The framework for analyzing hybrid features consists of
four parts (see Fig. 6.4).
The first part is synchronic comparable corpora testing which includes the
following five sub-procedures:
1. Identifying the difference between native Chinese and translated Chinese by using
comparable corpora. LCMC and ZCTC are balanced synchronic comparable
Chinese corpora, and they can offer data about the linguistic features to be analysed.
2. Checking the frequencies of specific language features in the two comparable
corpora, and carrying out tests of statistical significance.
3. If the significance level is high, we can carry out the further investigation of
collocational features (for the lexical level), semantic preference (grammatical
features), etc.
4. Analysing the hybridity features into different categories;
5. Offering a description of the tendency of the hybridity features in translated
Chinese. The target language’s influence on the translated language can be
described within this framework.
The second part consists of the parallel corpora testing which can present the
equivalences between source language and target language. The impact of the
source language on the target language can be identified with the help of a parallel
corpus.
The third part consists of diachronic comparable corpora testing. Changes in the
frequency of use of hybrid features in translated Chinese over time can be shown by
diachronic corpora. Such changes indicate ways in which Chinese is evolving.
The fourth part discusses the conclusions which can be drawn from the preced-
ing three parts.
It is obviously impossible to describe all the hybrid language features in trans-
lated Chinese within this framework. The present research focuses on the following
list of hybrid features which includes the lexical level such as word formation
features that in turn includes affixes (here we use suffixes as a case study) and
morphological increase in translated Chinese. The DV construction and its preva-
lence in translated Chinese are explored in Chap. 7. The classifier and its construc-
tions are analysed in Chap. 8 with ‘YI GE’ as a case study. Light verbs and their
constructions are explored in Chap. 9. Chapter 10 explores selected syntactic items
including ‘SHI’ and their structures as hybrid features in translated Chinese.
Finally, hybrid features at the level of discourse including such features as
nominalization and cohesive devices in translated Chinese are analysed in the
penultimate chapter of the thesis.
The multi-layered analyses of the corpora data at different linguistic levels
should shed new light on hybrid language features and the extensive impact of
language contact between English and Chinese.
6.6 Conclusions
The chapter has offered a detailed description of certain linguistic norms of native
Chinese which can be useful for differentiating translated Chinese from the original
Chinese. The norms introduced such as non-inflectional morphology, aspect promi-
nent, monosyllabism, paratactic syntax, etc. can be drawn upon as points of
reference for investigating the hybrid features in translated Chinese.
The corpus data show that a tendency to use disyllables is evident in both native
and translated Chinese. The chapter lists all the linguistic features that we will focus
on in our exploration of the corpus-based analysis of hybridity in translated and
native Chinese.
The framework for describing the hybridity features in translated Chinese was
also introduced in the present chapter; it includes four stages with sub-routines. The
corpus analysis framework can support the investigation of the features of hybridity
in translated Chinese, which is developed in detail in the following chapters.
References
Aitchison, J. 2001. Language change: Progress or decay? 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Arcodia, G.F. 2007. Chinese: A language of compound words? In Selected oroceedings of the
5th Décembrettes: Morphology in Toulouse, ed. F. Montermini, G. Boyé, and N. Hathout,
79–90. Somerville: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Chao, Y.R. 1968. A grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of
California Press.
Chen, P. 1999. Modern Chinese: History and sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Comrie, B. 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
References 87
Comrie, B. 1985. Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dai, G. 2013. Fanyi zhong Yuanyu Touguo Xiao Yanjiu (“SL shining through” in translated
languages). Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press. [戴光荣. (2013). hh翻译中 “源语透
过效应”研究ii. 上海: 上海交通大学出版社.]
DeFrancis, J. 1984. The Chinese language: Fact and fantasy. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Diao, Y. 2006. Xiandai HanyuShi (A history of modern Chinese). Fuzhou: Fujian Renmin
Dong, X. 2002. Cihuihua: Hanyu Shuangyinci de Yansheng he Fazhan (Lexicalization: The origin
and evolution of Chinese disyllabic words). Chengdu: Sichuang Minzu Chubanshe. [董秀芳.
(2002). hh词汇化:汉语双音词的衍生和发展ii. 成都: 四川民族出版社.]
Dong, X. 2011. Cihuihua: Hanyu Shuangyinci de Yansheng he Fazhan(Xiudingben) (Lexicali-
zation: The origin and evolution of Chinese disyllabic words. Revised version). Beijing:
Shangwu Yinshuguan. [董秀芳. (2011). hh词汇化:汉语双音节词的衍生和发展(修订本)ii.
北京: 商务印书馆.]
Gao, M. 1986. Hanyu Yufalun (On Chinese grammar). Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [高名凯.
(1986). hh汉语语法论ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
Gao, Y. 2009. Gushi Shijiushou yu Zisheng Meidian (The nineteen old poems and the aesthetics of
self-reflection). In Zhongguo Shuqing Chuantong de Zai Faxian (Rediscovery of Chinese
lyrical tradition), ed. Q. Ke, and C. Xiao, 223–245. Taibei: Taida Chuban Zhongxin. [高友
工. (2009). hh古诗十九首ii与自省美典. 柯庆民、肖驰, hh中国抒情传统的再发现ii
(pp. 223–245). 台北: 台大出版中心.]
Halliday, M.A.K., and E. McDonald. 2004. Metafunctional profile of the grammar of Chinese.
In Language typology: A functional perspective, ed. A. Caffarel, J.R. Martin, and
C.M.I.M. Matthiessen, 305–396. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing
Company.
Harbsmeier, C. 1998. Joseph Needham: Science and civilisation in China (Vol VII.1: Language and
logic). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hu, M. 1991. Yuyanxue Lunwenxuan (Collections of linguistics). Beijing: Zhongguo Renmin
Daxue Chubanshe. [胡明扬. (1991). hh语言学论文选ii. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社.]
Hu, M. 2002. Xinzhu Guoyu Wenfa de zai Renshi (Reevaluation of a new grammar of the Chinese
national language). Language Science 1(1): 92–101. [胡明扬. (2002). hh新著国语文法ii的再
认识和再评价. hh语言科学ii, 1(1), 92–101.]
Hu, M. 2003. Hu MingyangYuyanxue Lunwenji (Collections of articles on linguistics by Hu
Mingyang). Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [胡明扬. (2003). hh胡明扬语言学论文集ii. 北
京: 商务印书馆.]
Kao, Y. 1994. The nineteen old poems and the aesthetics of self-reflection. In The power of
culture: Studies in Chinese cultural history, ed. W.J. Peterson, A. Plaks, and Y.Y, 80–102.
Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.
Kauhanen, I. 2006. Norms and sociolinguistic description. In A man of measure: Festschrift in
honour of Fred Karlsson on his 60th birthday (A special supplement to SKY Journal of
Linguistics, vol 19: 2006), ed. M. Suominen, A. Arppe, A. Airola, O. Heinämäki,
M. Miestamo, U. Määttä, J. Niemi, K.K. Pitkänen, and K. Sinnemäki, 34–46. Turku:
The Linguistic Association of Finland.
Kennedy, G.A. 1951. The monosyllabic myth. Journal of the American Oriental Society 71(3):
161–166.
Labov, W. 1991. Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Li, F. 1973. Languages and dialects of China. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 1(1): 1–13.
Li, Z., Q. Liu, ed. 2007. Li Jinxi Wenji (Collected works of Li Jinxi). Ha’erbin: Heilongjiang
Jiaoyu Chubanshe. [黎泽渝,刘庆俄. (2007). hh黎锦熙文集ii. 哈尔滨: 黑龙江教育出版社.]
Li, C., and S. Thompson. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar.
Berkeley/London: University of California Press.
Lian, S. 1993. Yinghan Duibi Yanjiu (Contrastive studies of English and Chinese). Beijing:
Gaodeng Jiaoyu Chubanshe. [连淑能. (1993). hh英汉对比研究ii. 北京: 高等教育出版社.]
Lin, H. 2001. A grammar of Mandarin Chinese: Languages of the world/materials. Munich:
Lincom Europa.
Liu, D. 2010. Hanyu shi Yizhong Dongcixing Yuyan: Shishuo Dongcixing Yuyan he Mingcixing
Yuyan de Leixing Chayi (Chinese as a verby language: On typological differences between
verby languages and nouny languages). Chinese Teaching in the World 24(1): 3–17.[刘丹青.
(2010). 汉语是一种动词型语言——试说动词型语言和名词型语言的类型差异. hh世界汉
语教学ii, 24(1), 3–17.]
u, S. 1982. Zhongguo Wenfa Yaol€
L€ ue (Essentials of Chinese grammar). Beijing: Shangwu
Yinshuguan. [吕叔湘. (1982). hh中国文法要略ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
u, S. 1999. Xiandai Hanyu Babaici (Modern Chinese: 800 Words. Revised edition). Beijing:
L€
Shangwu Yinshuguan. [吕叔湘. (1999). hh现代汉语八百词(增订本)ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
Ma, J. 1983/1998. Mashi Wentong (The Chinese grammar). Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [马建
忠. (1983/1998). hh马氏文通ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
Norman, J. 1988. Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Packard, J.L., ed. 1997. New approaches to Chinese word formation: Morphology, phonology, and
the lexicon in modern and ancient Chinese. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Packard, J.L. 2000/2004. 构词法The morphology of Chinese: A linguistic and cognitive approach.
Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
Roksvold, T. 2010. Changes in newspaper language explored as changes in cultural norms.
Intercultural Communication Studies XIX(3): 104–111.
Ross, C., and J.S. Ma. 2006. Modern Mandarin Chinese grammar: A practical guide. London:
Routledge.
Steiner, E. 2008. Explicitation: Towards an empirical and corpus-based methodology. In Meaning
in context: Strategies for implementing intelligent applications of language studies,
Sun, C. 2006. Chinese: A linguistic introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tse, Y. 2010. Parataxis and hypotaxis in the Chinese language. International Journal of Arts and
Sciences 3(16): 351–359.
Li, Vol. 2, modern Chinese grammar). Jinan: Shandong Edecation Press.[王力. (1985). hh王力
文集(第二卷)中国现代语法ii. 济南: 山东教育出版社.]
Xiao, R., and T. McEnery. 2004. Aspect in Mandarin Chinese. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
Publishing Co.
Yu, G. 2002. Yu Guangzhong Tan Fanyi (Talks on translations by Yu Guangzhong). Beijing:
Zhongguo Duiwai Fanyi Chuban Gongsi. [余光中. (2002). hh余光中谈翻译ii. 北京: 中国对外
翻译出版公司.]
Zhang, B., ed. 2010. Xiandai Hanyu Miaoxie Yufa (A descriptive grammar of modern Chinese).
Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [张斌 (2010). hh现代汉语描写语法ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
Zuo, S. 2012. Jiyu Yuliaoku de Hanyuyiwen Tezheng Yanjiu: Tibiaoji Ge’an Tantao (Investigating
the features and tendencies of translated Chinese: A corpus-based case study of aspect
markers, MA Thesis). Zhongnan Daxue (Central South University of China). [左尚君.
(2012). hh基于语料库的汉语译文特征研究:体标记个案探讨ii(硕士学位论文). 中南大学.]
Fenbuchayi yu Jiedu (Aspect markers in native and translated Chinese: A Corpus-based
Investigation). Waiguo Yuyan Wenxue (Foreign Languages and Literatures) (3): 181–188.
[左尚君,戴光荣. (2013). 基于语料库的体标记在汉语母语与汉语译文中的分布差异与解
读. hh外国语言文学ii,(3), 181–188.]
Chapter 7
Lexical Features of Hybridity in Translated
Chinese
Abstract This chapter explores the lexical hybridity features in translated Chinese,
including morphological constructions, functional words and ‘DV constructions’. It
discusses the features of suffixes, variations of DV constructions in translated
Chinese with examples. The reasons for the prevalence of DV constructions in
Chinese are also discussed in the chapter.
7.1 Introduction
The linguistic feature of lexical hybridity is perhaps the most obvious characteristic
that distinguishes translated Chinese from non-translated Chinese. Elsewhere, we
have explored a range of hybrid lexical features, including word frequencies and
word length, keywords, word class distribution, pronouns and prepositions, idioms,
major types of punctuation in translated Chinese, using the resources of mono-
lingual Chinese comparable corpora, i.e., LCMC and ZCTC in our research (see
previous studies such as Dai and Xiao 2011; Xiao and Dai 2014, etc.). In these
studies, we simply presented the difference in the word frequencies in two corpora,
but did not describe or explain them in terms of hybridity. Some further detail is
given in the next section.
In the present and following chapters, we investigate the hybridity features in
translated Chinese on the basis of different types of corpora, i.e., comparable and
parallel, synchronic and diachronic, specific and general corpora. The present
chapter first offers a brief exploration of lexical features of translated Chinese,
then focuses on lexical hybridity in relation to the case studies. The list for the topic
includes morphological constructions such as the suffix ‘-zheng’ (症), ‘-zhi’ (制),
and lexical items such as functional words and ‘DV constructions’.

DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-0742-2_7
90 7 Lexical Features of Hybridity in Translated Chinese
7.2 Lexical Features of Translated Chinese
Our previous study on the basis of balanced Chinese comparable corpora (LCMC
and ZCTC) found that native Chinese displays a significantly higher overall score
than translated Chinese in terms of lexical density (the proportion of content words
in total words), “suggesting that native Chinese has a greater informational load
than translated Chinese” (Xiao and Dai 2014, p. 11).
Lexical words are the main carriers of meaning and information in a text (Biber
et al. 1999, p. 55), and lexical density of a text is the proportion of lexical words
expressed as a percentage. If N is the number of words in a text, and L is the number
of lexical words, then lexical density ¼100L/N (Stubbs 1996, p. 72).
Translated and non-translated Chinese texts differ in the lexical words for the
different topics, and it is meaningless to compare the difference between them. But
the function words could be compared, for they can make the sentences grammat-
ically cohesive and correct. Xiao and Dai (2014) also point out that translated
Chinese shows a higher proportion of function words. The keywords research
shows that pronouns (particularly personal pronouns, demonstrative pronouns),
conjunctions and prepositions are used more frequently in ZCTC than that in
LCMC. All these word categories are commonly used for textual cohesion and
coherence, and it seems plausible that the unusually high frequency of use of these
items is a consequence of translation from a hypotactic source language. Figure 7.1
illustrates the distribution of major function words in LCMC and ZCTC.
In order to explore the source language’s influence on the Chinese translations,
we concordanced the pronouns (tagged as ‘r’ in Chinese) from the English-Chinese
parallel corpus, Babel and obtained 18,655 occurrences (See Fig. 7.2). We
conducted a sampling verification and found out that 97 % of the pronouns in
Chinese texts are translated from English pronouns.
Figure 7.1 also shows that other word categories, such as classifiers, modal
particles are all more commonly used in LCMC, because Chinese is a classifier
language (see further, Chap. 8), while Chinese is also unique for its modal particles
(cf. Xiao and Dai 2014, p. 18). Modal particles (also known as ‘yǔqı̀ zhucı́’, or
“sentence-final” particles, such as ‘a’ (啊), ‘ne’(呢), ‘ba’ (吧), ‘ma’ (吗), etc.) are
used at the end of sentences to indicate the speakers’ attitude or mood. We
concordanced the modal particles (tagged as ‘y’ in Chinese) in Babel, and
Fig. 7.3 shows the concordancing results:
The concordancing results show 960 Chinese modal particles in Babel, for
example:
1a) <s n¼"L1E_4145">He_PPHS1 greeted_VVD us_PPIO2 politely_RR :_: "_"
Good_JJ trip_NN1 ?_? "_" </s>
1b)<s n¼"L2C_4145">他_r 只_d 是_v 礼貌_a 地_u 同_p 我们_r 打招呼_v :_w
"_w 旅途_n 愉快_a 吗_y ?_w "_w </s>
The modal particle ‘ma’ (吗) in the example expresses the interrogative mood,
which is equivalent to the mood of the English sentence, though the English
7.2 Lexical Features of Translated Chinese 91
90000
80000
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000 LCMC
10000 ZCTC
0
Fig. 7.1 Major function word categories in LCMC and ZCTC (cf. Xiao and Dai 2014, p. 27)
Fig. 7.2 Pronouns in Chinese texts and the English source equivalents
sentence does not use a modal particle. The translator’s use of modal particles in the
translated Chinese texts follows the target language norms here.
Figure 7.4 shows the concordance results for a special modal particle ‘le’ (了)
with high frequency (627 out of 960).
In Chinese, ‘le’ (了) can be used as a perfective aspect marker. The difference
between a perfective aspect marker and a modal particle is obvious: the perfective
aspect marker ‘le’ is used after a verb to indicate the aspect of the verb, while the
Fig. 7.3 Chinese modal particles in Babel
Fig. 7.4 Modal particle ‘le’ (了) in Babel
modal particle ‘le’ is used at the end of a sentence to indicate the speakers’ attitude
or mood. The frequencies of the perfective aspect marker ‘le’ in LCMC and ZCTC
are significantly different (9054: 8749, LL value is 12.59, p < 0.001). The source
language of English is tense-prominent, while Chinese is aspect-prominent, and the
translated Chinese texts differ from the non-translated Chinese ones in that the
7.3 Word-Formation Features of Translated Chinese 93
perfective aspect marker ‘le’ occurs with a lower frequency as a result of the ‘source
language shining through’ effect.
The above discussions on functional words in translated Chinese text show two
tendencies in the translation processes: the influence of the source language and the
normalization effect makes the functional words in the translated texts present
hybridity features that distinguish them from non-translated Chinese texts.
7.3 Word-Formation Features of Translated Chinese
One of the more interesting findings of Corpus Translation Studies relates to

features of word formation in translated texts. Kenny (2001) discusses the normal-
ization of creative lexis in translated texts which leads to a decrease in morpholog-
ical markers (Kenny 2001); Olohan (2004) finds that the lexis is more conservative
and conventional in translated fictional texts than in the source texts (Olohan 2004);
Wang and Qin (2010) show that the English source language leads to the overuse of
some specific derivational affixes in translated Chinese, such as ‘xing’ (性property)
which is similar to the English suffixes ‘-ity, -ness, -dom’ (Wang and Qin 2010,
p. 175). Lefer (2012) also discusses word-formation in translated texts and explores
the impact of language-pair specific features and genre variation in translated
languages, i.e., English and French (Lefer 2012).
The next section extends the discussion of morphology by focusing on suffixes
in translated Chinese.
7.3.1 Suffixes in Translated Chinese
As can be seen from Table 6.9, the suffix (k) is used more frequently in ZCTC than
in LCMC (LCMC 1797: ZCTC 2113, LL ¼ 27.46, p < 0.001).
The suffix category is also more frequent in ZCTC than in LCMC, in that we find
15 occurrences of ‘Zheng (症 disease)’ in LCMC, though it is used as a suffix only
12 times: there are two occurrences of ‘lǎoshuāizhèng’ (老衰症 senile disease) and
‘báixiězhèng’ (白血症 leukemia), ‘jiāolǜzhèng’ (焦虑症 anxiety disorder),
‘duōdòngzhèng’ (多动症 hyperactivity disorder), ‘tòngfēngzhèng’(痛风症 gout),
‘gāoxuèzhı̄zhèng’ (高血脂症 hyperlipidemia), ‘kǒnggāozhèng’ (恐高症 acrophobia),
‘jianwangzhèng’ (健忘症 amnesia), ‘shénjı̄ng guānnéngzhèng’ (神经官能症
neurosis) and ‘duōyı́zhèng’ (多疑症 paranoia). The other three ‘zheng(症)’ are
‘duı̀zhēngxiayao’(an idiom 对症下药, which literally means to prescribe a special
medicine for the disease), ‘tı̄ngzhēngqı̀’ (听诊器 stethoscope), a piece of medical
equipment, and ‘(shı̀jiè) nánzhèng’ (世界难症 incurable diseases in the world). The
three other instances of ‘zheng’ are not suffixes, but components of a special word
in Chinese.
Fig. 7.5 ‘zheng (症)’ in ZCTC
However, ‘zheng (症)’ is used more frequently in ZCTC; the concordancing

result gives 40 occurrences, as shown in Fig. 7.5.
The ‘zheng (症)s’ in ZCTC are used in more situations, such as ‘fuhéxı̀ng miǎnyı̀
quēxianzhèng’ (复合性免疫缺陷症 severe combined immunodeficiency: SCID),
‘aodāngmòshı̀zhèng’ (奥当默氏症, 老年痴呆症 Alzheimer’s disease),
‘yōuyuzhèng’ (忧郁症 melancholia), etc.
Figure 7.6 illustrates ‘zheng’(症) translated from English in parallel corpus of
Babel:
All these 62 instances of ‘zheng’ (症) are the results of translations from the
English source language as the following two types: the first type is ‘zheng’ (症)
translated from English words such as ‘disease’, ‘failure’, etc.; the second type of
‘zheng’(症) is a kind of basic category term, adding to the concrete nouns of disease
in Chinese. For example:
2a) <s n¼"L1E_1869">Price_NP1 discovered_VVD that_CST during_II the_AT
last_MD 12_MC years_NNT2 of_IO O’Neill_NP1 ’s_GE life_NN1 ,_, he_
PPHS1 suffered_VVD from_II a_AT1 lethal_JJ and_CC rare_JJ neuro-
degenerative_JJ disease_NN1 known_VVN as_II cortical_JJ cerebellar_JJ
atrophy_NN1 ._. </s>
2b)<s n¼"L2C_1869">普赖斯_nr 发现_v ,_w 在_p 奥尼尔_nr 生命_n 最后_f
的_u 12_m 年_q 里_f ,_w 他_r 深受_v 小脑_n 皮质_n 层_n 萎缩_v 症_k
-_w 一_m 种_m 致命_a 的_b 且_c 罕见_a 的_b 神经_n 变性_v 疾病_n
-_w 的_b 折磨_v 。_w </s>
The English ‘neurodegenerative disease’ is translated into Chinese ‘xiǎonǎo
pı́zhı̀céng wěisuǒzhèng’小脑皮质层萎缩症, with ‘disease’ translated using
‘zheng’ (症).
3a) <s n¼"L1E_4420">Postcrash_VV0 amnesia_NN1 has_VHZ robbed_VVN
him_PPHO1 of_IO the_AT vital_JJ three_MC or_CC four_MC
Fig. 7.6 ‘zheng’ (症) in Babel
minutes_NNT2 that_CST preceded_VVD the_AT crash_NN1 in_II the_AT

Pont_NP1 d’Alma_NP1 tunnel_NN1 and_CC its_APPGE aftermath_NN1 ,
_, when_CS he_PPHS1 lay_VVD suspended_VVN between_II life_NN1
and_CC death_NN1 ._. </s>
3b)<s n¼"L2C_4420">撞车_v 造成_v 的_u 健忘_a 症_k 已_d 抹掉_v 了_u 关
于_p 阿尔玛桥_ns 隧道_n 里_f 撞车_v 前_f 至关紧要_l 的_u 三四_m 分
钟_q 以及_c 事后_t 情况_n 的_u 记忆_n 。_w 那时_r 他_r 正_d 悬_v 命
_vg 于_p 生死_n 之间_f 。_w </s>
The condition of ‘amnesia’ in sentence (3a) is translated into ‘jianwangzhèng’健
忘症. Other examples, such as ‘multiple sclerosis’ are translated into Chinese as
‘duōfāxı̀ng yı̀nghuazhèng’多发性硬化症, ‘schizophrenia’ as ‘jı̄ngshén
fēnlièzhèng’ 精神分裂症, etc.
Another interesting lexical phenomenon is the high frequency of ‘zhi’ (制) in
LCMC and ZCTC as a suffix. The concordancing result for LCMC shows 67 occur-
rences, while ZCTC has 200 (see Figs. 7.7 and 7.8).
In classical Chinese, ‘zhi’ (制) can be used as a verb as in the following sentence:
‘zhı̀bǐshǎngyı̄, wushı̀xı́ngméi’ (制彼裳衣,勿士行枚, hh诗经 · 东山ii:making/pre-
paring casual clothes, and serving no more in the army, from Shi Jing Book of
Odes). ‘zhi’ (制) means “making or preparing clothes” in the sentence.
It can also means “crack down on, keep within limits” as a verb, such as
‘shòuzhı̀yúrén’ (受制于人: under others’ control). It can be used as a noun meaning
“regulations, rules”, such as ‘xiānwángzhı̄zhı̀’ (先王之制: the rules of the ancient
kings).
Corpus analysis suggests a difference in the usage of ‘zhi’ (制) in translated
Chinese when compared to non-translated Chinese. The concordancing results for
Fig. 7.7 ‘zhi’ (制) in ZCTC
Fig. 7.8 ‘zhi’ (制) in LCMC
this item are presented in Tables 7.1 and 7.2. There are 67 occurrences of ‘zhi’ (制)
in LCMC, but just 26 of them are used as a suffix, while there are more than 180 out
of 200 instances of its being used as a suffix in ZCTC.
Most of the occurrences of ‘zhi’ (制) in Table 7.1 reflect the historical and
cultural events in China, such as 联产承包制 (liánchǎn chéngbāo zhı̀: household
responsibility system), while Table 7.2 presents a different picture in translated
Chinese:
Table 7.1 ‘zhi’ (制) in LCMC

Corpus Chinese Pinyin English-translation Frequency
LCMC 禁制 jı̀nzhı̀ inhibition 5
个人所得税 gèrénsuǒdéshuı̀zhı̀ individual income tax rates 3
制
基金制 jı̄jı̄nzhı̀ fund system 2
16进制 16jı̀nzhı̀ hexadecimal number system 2
外婚制 waihunzhı̀ exogamous system 2
一党制 yı̀dǎngzhı̀ single-party system 1
独立国家制 dúlı̀guojiāzhı̀ national independence 1
system
多妻制 duōqı̄zhı̀ polygamy 1
劳动合同制 láodònghétongzhı̀ Contract labor system 1
联产承包制 liánchǎnchéngbāozhı̀ Household-responsibility 1
system
导师制 dǎoshı̄zhı̀ tutor system 1
计件工资制 jı̀jiangōngzı̀zhı̀ piece-rate system 1
非国有制 fēiguoyǒuzhı̀ non state-owned system 1
封建领主制 fēngjianlǐngzhǔzhı̀ feudal lords system 1
原始公社制 yuánshǐgōngshèzhı̀ primitive commune system 1
封建自主制 fēngjianzı̀zhǔzhı̀ feudal allodial system 1
Total 16 classes 26
number suffixes
Table 7.2 tells us that most of occurrences of ‘zhi’ (制) in translated texts reflect
foreign historical and cultural phenomena, such as ‘君主立宪制’ (junzhǔlı̀xianzhı̀:
constitutional monarchy), ‘沙皇君主制’ (shāhuángjunzhǔzhı̀: tsarist monarchy
system), ‘教阶制’ (jiaojiēzhı̀: hierarchism), etc. All these items reflect the foreign
cultural background which is different from Chinese culture, and these examples of
‘-zhi’ are translated from source language, i.e., English in this case.
Table 7.2 shows that more forms of ‘zhi’ (制) in translated Chinese have been
used as the component of compound words, and it functions as an inflectional affix
in English.
We also concordanced ‘zhi’ (制) in the diachronic academic translated Chinese
corpora. Figure 7.9 shows the concordancing results screenshot of ‘zhi’ (制) from
MCCC-ACADEMIC-TC (1970s–2000s):
The result in the 1930s–1960s is 380 hits (but in just 208 is ‘zhi’ used as a suffix),
while the result in the 1970s–2000s is 1110 hits (with 986 examples of ‘zhi’ used as
a suffix). It shows the increasing tendency to use ‘zhi’ (制) in translated Chinese in
the academic genre in the diachronic corpus.
The data raises the question of whether ‘zhi’ (制), a content verb in classical
Chinese, has changed its grammatical function to become an inflectional affix.
According to the grammaticalization hypothesis, the ‘cline of grammaticality’ is:
Content item > grammatical word > clitic > inflectional affix (each item to the right
Table 7.2 ‘zhi’ (制) in ZCTC

Corpus Chinese Pinyin English-translation Frequency
ZCTC 规制 guı̄zhı̀ bylaw 58
循环制 xúnhuánzhı̀ round-robin system 18
现收现付制 xianshōuxianfuzhı̀ accounting on a cash 17
basis
基金制 jı̄jı̄nzhı̀ Fund system 11
赛制 saizhı̀ Competition system 6
定额给付制 dı̀ng’ égěifuzhı̀ Flat rate pension system 6
现金交易报 xianjı̄njiaoyibaogaozhı̀ currency transaction 4
告制 report
普遍优惠制 pǔbianyōuhuı̀zhı̀ Generalized System of 3
(GSP) Preferences
银本位制 yı́nběnweı̀zhı̀ silver standard system 3
货币本位制 huòbı̀běnweı̀zhı̀ Money Standard System 2
等级制 děngjı́zhı̀ caste system 2
每周五天工 měizhōuwǔtiāngōngzuòzhı̀ five-day workweek 1
作制
沙皇君主制 shāhuángjunzhǔzhı̀ tsarist monarchy system 1
民主制 mı́nzhǔzhı̀ democratic system 1
教阶制 jiaojiēzhı̀ hierarchism 1
君主立宪制 junzhǔlı̀xianzhı̀ constitutional monarchy 1
一夫一妻制 yı̀fuyı̀qı̄zhı̀ Monogamy 1
四年制 sı̀niánzhı̀ Four-year system 1
半日制 banrı̀zhı̀ half-day system 1
代表制 daibiǎozhı̀ Representation system 1
师徒制 shı̄túzhı̀ Mentor System 1
中央集权制 zhōngyāngjı́quánzhı̀ centralized system 1
“名词 þ 制” “Noun þ Zhı̀” (made in)
皮制 pı́zhı̀ leather 2
绳制 shéngzhı̀ rope 2
铁制 tiězhı̀ iron 3
钛制 taizhı̀ ilmenite 1
陶制 táozhı̀ figuline 4
等 etc. etc. ...
“国名 þ 制” “Country þ Zhı̀” (made in the country) 1
英制 yı̄ngzhı̀ made in UK 2
美制 měizhı̀ American-made 3
俄制 é’zhı̀ Russian-made
Total 25 classes >180
number suffixes
Fig. 7.9 ‘zhi’ (制) in ACADEMIC-TC 1970s–2000s
is more clearly grammatical and less lexical than its partner to the left. cf. Hopper
and Traugott 2003, p. 7).
Most of the instances of ‘zhi’ (制) in ZCTC and LCMC are ellipses of ‘zhidu’
(制度regulations, rules). That is to say, the apparent ‘inflectional suffix’ of ‘zhi’
(制) is actually a content word, and different from the English inflectional suffix.
However, all the instances of ‘zhi’ (制) in ZCTC show the influence of the
English source language, and it is possible that the translated texts’ use of ‘zhi’ as an
inflectional suffix opens up the possibility for using it in this way in non-translated
texts too. This example may also be indicative of a wider tendency, as the following
section explores.
7.3.2 Morphological Increase in Translated Chinese
In English, the derivation process, which is the main means of word-formation,

forms new words from existing words, such as ‘alignment’ (align + ment), ‘alert-
ness’ (alert + ness), etc. This kind of derivation is not a common phenomenon in
Chinese, and the affixes with high frequencies in translated Chinese are not stable.
The words derived by adding suffixes or prefixes are not stable for their part of
speech (POS) in different situations (Dong 2005). The affix components can be
polysemous, as with ‘zheng’ (症), and ‘zhi’ (制) discussed in the preceding section,
or they can be used as suffixes on the one hand, and also used as content words or
roots on the other hand. For example, Zhang (2002) analyses the type of words with
the suffix ‘hua’ (化) commonly used in Chinese. All the words with the same suffix
‘hua’ (化) can be used as transitive, intransitive verbs, adjectives and nouns. All
these aspects are dramatically different from English (Zhang 2002).
Xu (2007) carried out a syntactic and semantic study of the ‘xing’ (性) affix in
Chinese. His findings were that ‘xing’ (性) can be divided into four classes
according to its collocations, i.e., ‘adjective/noun/verb/numeral + xing’, and he
drew the conclusion that ‘xing’ (性) can be used as a nominalization marker on
the one hand, and also used as a distinguishing word marker (Xu 2007,
pp. 118–154).
Since Chinese does not have inflectional morphology, the increase in the use of
morphological features such as affixes in translated Chinese should be analysed
carefully. The concordancing results show that some of the occurrences in trans-
lated Chinese cannot be categorized as “real” affixes, because the semantic
bleaching processes have not been completed thoroughly, and sometimes the
affixes can be used as roots, so we have borrowed the description of ‘quasi-affix’
(cf. L€
u 1979; Chen 1994; Yin 2007) to categorize these usages.
The exploration of the concordancing results suggests to us that the tendency to
favour inflectional affixization in translated Chinese is the result of the source
language interference or the “source language shining through” (Teich 2003; Dai
2013).
7.4 ‘DV Constructions’ in Translated Chinese
The section will explore another lexical construction in translated Chinese which
has attracted some attention in recent years, for example, He (2006, 2008a, b) and
Ma (2010).
According to He (2006), the DV constructions can be divided into the following
categories: (a) N + DE + V construction; (b) N + V construction; (c) PP + DE + V
construction, and (d) V + V construction. The following section will focus on the
first two constructions.
7.4.1 ‘N + DE + V’ Constructions
He (2008b) investigated the ‘N + DE + V’ constructions and his findings focused on

some specific characteristics of ‘V’. It must be a disyllabic verb construction, and
monosyllabic verbs are rare; the ‘V’ should be bare-verb, adjective or the verb
structure with adverbial modifier in the following: ‘Léifēngtǎ de dǎodiao’(雷峰塔
的倒掉: the falling of Leifeng pagoda), ‘shı̀wu de huxiāng zhuǎnhua’ (事物的互相
转化: mutual transformation of things) (cf. He 2008b, pp. 45–48).
We concordanced the ‘N + DE + V’ construction in the native Chinese corpus of
LCMC with different search constraints.
7.4 ‘DV Constructions’ in Translated Chinese 101
Fig. 7.10 ‘n’ þ ‘ude1’ þ ‘v’ in LCMC
The first concordance search was ‘n’ + ‘ude1’ + ‘v’ (noun + DE + general verb),
and the concordancing result shows 305 occurrences, illustrated in Fig. 7.10:
We changed the concordance search to ‘n’ + ‘ude1’ + ‘v/vn’ (noun + DE
+ general verb/gerund), i.e., the query condition is as the following:
<seq><pos><word>_</word><poscode key¼“wtag”>n</poscode></
pos><pos><word>_</word><poscode key¼“wtag”>ude1</poscode></
pos><or><pos><word>_</word><poscode key¼“wtag”>v</poscode></
pos><pos><word>_</word><poscode key¼“wtag”>vn</poscode></
pos></or></seq>
And the query of ‘n + ude1 + v/vn’ with Xaira will present different results. The
number of concordance lines increased as shown in Fig. 7.11:
The concordancing result in ZCTC shows 3497 instances with the same search
routine. All the concordancing results tell us that the ‘v’ can be one of the set of
verbs, adjectives, verb constructions and they are in accordance with the require-
ments discussed in He (2008b). However, the ‘v’ can also be a gerund.
Some researchers have discussed the reasons for the increase of the ‘N + DE + V’
construction in MWC. L€u (1952/2002) discussed the high frequency of the‘N + DE
+ V’constructions in Chinese as a result of the impact of English grammar (L€u
1952/2002, p. 152). The hybridity characteristics of this construction in Chinese,
especially in translated Chinese is influenced by the source language as is shown in
the following examples: “marriage commitment” (hunyı̄n de chéngnuò 婚姻的承
诺), “ the increase of its price” (láodòng jiagé de zēngjiā 劳动价格的增加).
In order to check the English equivalences of ‘N + DE + V’ constructions, we
concordanced the English-Chinese parallel corpus, Babel. Figure 7.12 shows the
results of the search for ‘N + DE + V’ constructions in the Babel corpus.
Fig. 7.11 ‘n’ þ ‘ude1’ þ ‘v/vn’ in LCMC
Fig. 7.12 ‘N þ DE þ V’ constructions in Babel
The figure shows that there exist 953 examples of ‘N + DE + V’ constructions in

Babel. The question is then: what range of realizations in English does this
construction translate?
The English equivalences of ‘N + DE + V’ constructions can be divided into the
following kinds:
1. N’s + N
South Africa’s transition (N’s + N): 南非的转变 (nánfēi DE zhuǎnbian: the
transition of South Africa)
Korea’s recovery (N’s + N): 韩国的复苏 (hánguo DE fusu: the recovery of

Korea)
2. A+N
racial oppression (A + N): 种族的压迫 (zhǒngzú DE yāpò)
rapid industrialisation (A + N): 高速度的工业化 (gāosudu DE gōngyèhua)
professional deception (A + N):职业性的欺骗 (zhı́yèxı̀ng DE qı̄pian)
coral bleaching (A + N): 珊瑚的漂白 (shānhú DE piǎobái)
3. N + of + N
the passage of time (N + of + N): 时间的推移 (shı́ijiān DE tuı̄yı́)
the liberation of South Africa (N + of + N):南非的解放 (nánfēi DE jiěfang)
incidence of high blood (N + of + N): 高血压的发生 (gāoxuèyā DE fāshēng)
4. Gerund + of + N
the scheduling of this interview (Gerund + of + N): 采访的安排 (cǎifǎng DE
ānpái)
real-time buying of goods (Gerund + of + N):商品的实时购买 (shāngpǐn DE
shı́shı́ gòumǎi)
the warning of major solar events (Gerund + of + N):太阳大活动的预报
(taiyáng dahu
odòng DE yubao)
5. Others
the markets opening up: 市场的开放 (shı̀cháng DE kāifang)
A vulnerability to environmental disaster: 易受环境灾祸的损伤 (yı̀shòu
huánjı̀ng zāihuò DE sǔnshāng)
7.4.2 ‘N + V’ Constructions
According to He (2008b), the ‘N + DE + V’ construction is provisional, while the

‘N + V’ is steady. The ‘N + V’ construction can be used widely in daily communi-
cation, especially for the expressions of new concepts, such as ‘tǐzhı̀gǎigé’体制改
革 (system reform), ‘jiēgòu tiáozhěng’结构调整 (frame adjustment).
We concordanced the ‘N + V’ constructions in ZCTC and Fig. 7.13 shows the
results:
There exists a large number of the constructions in translated Chinese (the
concordancing result is 25,548). Zhu (1982/1999) argues that the verb modified
by a noun has the characteristics of a noun, so the ‘V’ in the ‘N + V’ construction
has the specific characteristics of a noun, and it can be regarded as the result of
nominalization (Zhu 1999, p. 71).
Again we can compare the Chinese translations with their English equivalents to
see the range of expressions that the Chinese construction is used to translated.
Figure 7.14 shows the parallel corpus concordancing results of the ‘N
+ V’constructions in Babel.
There are more ‘N + V’ constructions (11,405 in number) than ‘N + DE + V’
constructions (953 in number) in Babel, and the results shows the tendency to use
Fig. 7.13 ‘N þ V’ constructions in ZCTC
Fig. 7.14 ‘N þ V’ constructions in Babel
more ‘N + V’ constructions than ‘N + DE + V’ constructions in both translated

Chinese and non-translated Chinese.
He (2008b) argues that evidence such as this supports the argument that con-
temporary Chinese is changing as a result of the influence of translation from
English (He 2008b, p. 50). English is rich in action nouns which can be modified
by other nouns or adjectives derived from nouns, as in the following examples:
development of the economy (N + of + N): ‘jı̄ngjı̄ fāzhǎn’ 经济发展 (N + V)
air pollution (N + N): ‘kōngqı̀ wurǎn’ 空气污染 (N + V)

community development (N + N): ‘shèqu fāzhǎn’ 社区发展 (N + V)
business management (N + N): ‘qı́yè guǎnlǐ’ 企业管理 (N + V)
physical examinination (A + N): ‘tǐgé jiǎnchá’ 体格检查 (N + V)
peaceful transformation (A + N): ‘hépı́ng gǎizao’ 和平改造 (N + V)
public service (A + N): ‘gōngzhòng fúwu’ 公众服务 (N + V)
7.4.3 Reasons for the Prevalence of DV-Constructions

in Chinese
In this section we consider the reasons why DV constructions are so commonly

used in both translated and non-translated Chinese. According to Zhu (1983), some
English verbs can change into nouns with the nominal suffixes such as ‘-ment’,
‘-tion’ etc. This kind of derivation is regarded as ‘zizhi’ (自指self-reference) by
Zhu (1983). Chinese is not an inflectional language, and there exist no such suffixes
which represent nouns categorized as ‘zizhi’ (self-reference) in English. So the
English action nouns with ‘zizhi’ (self-reference) cannot be translated into Chinese
nouns, they must be translated into Chinese verbs as in the following examples
(some of them have been adapted from He 2008b, pp. 40–41):
English adjectives can be changed into nouns with some nominal suffixes. All
these nouns can be translated into Chinese adjectives, as in the examples listed in
Table 7.4:
There exist no inflections in Chinese which change verbs or adjectives into
nouns as in English, so the examples in Tables 7.3 and 7.4 show that the English
Table 7.3 English nouns and Chinese translations
English noun V þ ment/tion Chinese translation Literal meaning
adjustment tiáozhěng (调整) adjust
establishment jianlı̀ (建立) establish
management guǎnlǐ (管理) manage
exploration tancè (探测) explore
development fāzhǎn (发展) develop
liberation jiěfang (解放) liberate
Table 7.4 English nouns and Chinese translations

English noun Adj þ ity/ness Chinese translation Literal meaning
rapidity xunsu (迅速) rapid
verbosity rǒngcháng (冗长) verbose
coldness hánlěng (寒冷) cold
greatness wěida (伟大) great
minority shǎoshu (少数) minor
complexity fuzá (复杂) complex
nouns formed from verbs and adjectives with nominal suffixes can be translated
into Chinese as verbs or adjectives. The result is that the verbs and adjectives in
Chinese appear in the positions which, normatively, should be used by nominal
components, which explains the prevalence of DV constructions in both translated
Chinese and current native Chinese. It is plausible that the rise of the
DV-constructions in modern Chinese is the result of language contact with
Indo-European language (He 2006).
7.5 Conclusions
This chapter focused on the lexical hybridity in translated Chinese. It investigated

the functional words (such as modal particles) in translated Chinese which are
different from non-translated Chinese, and it also discusses the suffixes in translated
Chinese, focusing on some suffixes, such as ‘zheng’ (症) and ‘zhi’(制) which show
the tendency of inflectional affixization of the translated Chinese with the influence
of the source language or “source language shining through” effect.
The chapter also explored the DV-Construction in translated Chinese with
numerous examples. The corpora data support the argument that DV constructions
are commonly used in contemporary Chinese because of language contact with
English, and also the DV constructions in translated Chinese are used with more
variations such as ‘N + DE + V’, ‘N + V’, ‘PP + DE + V’, ‘V + V’ constructions than
in native Chinese.
References
Biber, D., S. Johansson, G. Leech, S. Conrad, and E. Finegan (eds.). 1999. Longman grammar of
spoken and written English. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Chen, G. 1994. Hanyu Cifa Lun (On Chinese morphology). Shanghai: Xuelin Chubanshe.[陈光磊.
(1994). hh汉语词法论ii. 上海: 学林出版社.]
Dai, G. 2013. Fanyi zhong Yuanyu Touguo Xiao Yanjiu (“SL shining through” in translated
Dai, G., and R. Xiao. 2011. Yiwen zhong Yuanyu Touguo Xiaoying Yanjiu: Jiyu Yuliaoku de
corpus-based study of Chinese translation of English passives). Translation Quarterly (62):
85–107. [戴光荣,肖忠华. (2011). 译文中 “源语透过效应”研究——基于语料库的英译汉被
动句研究. hh翻译季刊ii,(62), 85–107.]
Dong, X. 2005. Hanyu Cizhui de Xingzhi yu Hanyu Cifa Tedian (On Chinese affixes and related
morphological properties). Chinese Language Learning (6): 13–19. [董秀芳. (2005). 汉语词
缀的性质与汉语词法特点. hh汉语学习ii, (6), 13–19.]
He, Y. 2006. Xiandai Hanyu DV Jiegou de Xingqi ji Fazhan yu Yinou Yuyan de Yingxiang (The
appearance of DV constructions in modern Chinese and influences from Indo-European
languages). Journal of Renmin University of China (2): 136–142. [贺阳. (2006). 现代汉语
DV结构的兴起及发展与印欧语言的影响. hh中国人民大学学报ii, (2), 136–142.]
References 107
He, Y. 2008a. Xiandai Hanyu Ouhua Yufa Xianxiang Yanjiu (Studies on Europeanized Chinese
grammar). Chinese Teaching in the World (4): 16–31. [贺阳. (2008a). 现代汉语欧化语法现
象研究. hh世界汉语教学ii,(4), 16–31.]
He, Y. 2008b. Xiandai Hanyu Ouhua Yufa Xianxiang Yanjiu (On Europeanized Chinese gram-
mar). Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [贺阳. (2008b). hh现代汉语欧化语法现象研究ii. 北京:
商务印书馆.]
Hopper, P.J., and E.C. Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Kenny, D. 2001. Lexis and creativity in translation: A corpus-based study. Manchester: St. Jerome
Publishing.
Lefer, M. 2012. Word-formation in translated language: The impact of language-pair specific
features and genre variation. Across Languages and Cultures 13(2): 145–172.
u, S. 1952/2002. L€
L€ u Shuxiang Quanji Disijuan: Yufa Xiuci Jianghua (The complete works of L€ u
Shuxiang: Vol. 4 A Talk on grammatical rhetoric). Shenyang: Liaoning Jiaoyu Chubanshe. [吕
叔湘. (1952/2002). hh吕叔湘全集第04卷-语法修辞讲话ii. 沈阳: 辽宁教育出版社.]
u, S. 1979. Hanyu Yufa Fenxi Wenti (Analysis of Chinese grammar problems). Beijing: Shangwu
L€
Yinshuguan. [吕叔湘. (1979). hh汉语语法分析问题ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
modern Chinese. Doctoral dissertation). Anhui University. [马春华. (2010). hh现代汉语欧化
Olohan, M. 2004. Introducing corpora in translation studies. London/New York: Routledge.
Wang, K., and H. Qin. 2010. A parallel corpus-based study of translational Chinese. In Using
corpora in contrastive and translation studies, ed. R. Xiao, 164–181. Newcastle: Cambridge
Scholars Publishing.
Xiao, R., and G. Dai. 2014. Lexical and grammatical properties of translational Chinese: Trans-
Xu, J. 2007. Yuyan Guihua yu Yuyan Jiaoyu (Language planning and language education).
Shanghai: Xuelin Chubanshe. [徐杰. (2007). hh语言规划与语言教育ii. 上海: 学林出版社.]
Yin, H. 2007. Xiandai Hanyu Leicizhui Yanjiu (Study on the quasi-affix of modern Chinese)
(Doctoral dissertation). Shandong University. [尹海良. (2007). hh现代汉语类词缀研究(博士
论文)ii. 山东大学.]
Zhang, Y. 2002. HUA wei Dongci Gongneng Ruohua de Dengji Xulie (Degree sequence of
functional reduction on hua suffix verb). Zhongguo Yuwen (Studies of the Chinese Language)
(1): 50–54. [张云秋. (2002). “化”尾动词功能弱化的等级序列. hh中国语文ii,(1), 50–54.]
Zhu, D. 1983. Zizhi he Zhuanzhi: Hanyu Mingcihua Biaoji DE, Zhe, SUO, ZHI de Yufagongneng
he Yuyigongneng (Self-reference and other reference: Nominalization markers of DE, ZHE,
SUO, ZHI and their grammatical and semantical functions). Fangyan (Dialect) (1): 16–31. [朱
德熙. (1983). 自指和转指:汉语名词化标记 “的、者、所、之”的语法功能和语义功能.
hh方言ii,(1), 16–31.]
Zhu, D. 1999. Zhu Dexi Wenji Diyijuan: Yufa Jiangyi, Yufawenda, Dingyu he Zhuangyu (The
complete works of Zhu Dexi, Vol. 1: Lectures on grammar, Qs & As to grammar, attributives
and adverbials). Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [朱德熙. (1999). hh朱德熙文集(第1卷) 语法
讲义、语法答问、定语和状语ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
Chapter 8
Classifier Constructions in Translated
Chinese
Abstract This chapter discusses another hybridity feature which related to

nominalization in translated Chinese: classifier construction. It first introduces the
categories of classifier in Chinese, the different usage of classifier construction
between Chinese and English, and the difference between the translated and
non-translated Chinese. The analyses are based on qualitative and quantitative
methods from a synchronic perspective. It also offers the explanations for the
prevalence of the classifier constructions in Chinese.
8.1 Introduction
While classifiers have been used in Chinese for over 3000 years, the technical term,
‘classifier’, is only a recent phenomena in grammars of the Chinese language. The
classifier was the last to have been recognized by grammarians as one of the eleven
word classes in Chinese because members in this category cannot function inde-
pendently as sentential constituents. Syntactically, they are used after a demonstra-
tive pronoun or numeral, and before a noun, as with ‘zhāng’ (张) and ‘gè’ (个) in the
sentence ‘zhè zhāng zhuōzi liǎnggèrén táibúdòng’ (这张桌子两个人抬不动 This
table cannot be lifted up by two people). The ‘numeral + classifier’ construction can
be named ‘NC’ for short (Ding et al., 1961/1999, p. 168).
8.2 Categories of Classifier in Chinese
Modern Written Chinese makes frequent use of classifiers and the ‘classifier’ is an
important linguistic feature which marks lexical items as belonging to the same
semantic class. Each noun has its own specific classifier which can indicate “shape,
size, colour, movability, animacy, status”, and other properties (Crystal, 2008,
p. 78). A classifier categorizes a class of nouns by picking out some salient
perceptual properties, either physically or functionally based (Ross & Ma, 2006,
p. 43).

DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-0742-2_8
110 8 Classifier Constructions in Translated Chinese
Table 8.1 Types of Classifiers (Chao, 1968, p. 619)

n>1 M MM 的 N Listable
1 Mc Classifiers, or Individual Measures √ 个 (√) * 人 √
2 Mc’ Classifiers Associated with V-O √ 句 (√) () 话 √
3 Mg Group Measures √ 行 (√) () 字 √
4 Mp Partitive Measures √ 堆 (*) () 土 √
5 Mo Container Measures √ 锅 (*) () 面 *
6 Mt Temporary Measures * 地 * √ 东西 *
7 Mm Standard Measures () √ 尺 (√) √ 布 (√)
8 Mq Quasi-Measures √ 课 (√) * * (√)
9 Mv Measures for Verbs √ 趟 (√) * * √
In Allan’s (1977) cross-linguistic classifications, classifier categories can be

divided into the following types, i.e., material, shape, consistency, size, location,
arrangement, and quanta (Allan, 1977, p. 297). In this sense, the Chinese classifier
system includes the following categories: Material: (in)animacy, abstract, verbal
nouns; Shape: long, flat, round or one-dimensional, two-dimensional, three-
dimensional; Consistency: flexible, hard/rigid, non-discrete; Size: big and small
(Tai, 1992, pp. 589–590; 1994, p. 5).
Some researchers use ‘measure words’ or ‘measures’ to mean classifiers, for
example, Chao (1968) adopts the label ‘measure words’, and defines a ‘measure
word’ as a bound morpheme which forms a D-M (determinative-measure) com-
pound with one of the determinatives. Chao (1968) divides classifiers into 9 groups,
i.e. classifiers, or individual measures (Mc); classifiers specially associated with
V-O constructions (Mc’), group measures (Mg), partitive measures (Mp), container
measures (Mo), temporary measures (Mt), standard measures (Mm), quasi-
measures (Mq), measures for verbs (Mv) (Chao, 1968, pp. 584–585). Table 8.1
presents all the classifier categories and their specific features in Chinese:
In Table 8.1, ‘n’ signifies the numerals, ‘M’ signifies the classifier/measure
words, ‘MM’ indicates the repetition of measure words, ‘的’ (de) refers to the
‘N + 的 (de) + M’, ‘N’ signifies the nouns after the measure words, ‘listable’ refers
to the limited set of classifier words that can be listed, ‘√’ means ‘yes’, ‘*’ means
‘no’, and ‘()’ indicates ‘in most cases’ or ‘not absolutely’.
In the present research, we consider the classifier as closed category word, while
some measure words in Chao (1968) belong to the open category.
8.3 Classifier Constructions in Chinese and English
Chinese classifiers always occur with a number, e.g., ‘yi’ (one), ‘san’ (three), and/or
a specifier, i.e., ‘zhe’ (this), ‘na’ (that) before the noun (Li & Thompson, 1981,
pp. 104–105). The classifier construction in Chinese is “(specifier) (+) number
+ classifier + noun”.
8.3 Classifier Constructions in Chinese and English 111
For example,
1) sān gè rén
三个人
three (number) CLF person
three people/persons
2) wǔ jia fēijı̄
五架飞机
five (number) CLF plane
Five planes
3) zhè suǒ xuéxiao

这所学校
this (specifier) CLF school
this school
4) na sān běn shu

那三本书
that (specifier) three CLF book
Those three books
(All the examples are adapted from Ross & Ma, 2006, p. 43 and Li & Thompson,
1981, p. 104).
English is different from Chinese in respect of the use of classifiers. English has
two kinds of classifiers (Quirk et al., 1985, p. 261 adopts the technical label of
‘quantifiers’); one is the closed-class one, such as ‘many’, ‘(a) few’ and ‘several’,
‘much’ and ‘(a) little’; the determiners ‘any, no, and some’, and the predeterminers
‘all, both’. The other is the open-class classifiers and most of them consist of a noun
of quantity (lot, deal, amount, etc) followed by “of” and often preceded by the
indefinite article, such as ‘plenty of, a lot of, lots of, a great/good deal of, a quantity
(amount) of, a large number of’(Quirk et al. 1985, pp. 263–264).
In English, we can say ‘three persons’ without a classifier between the number
and noun if the noun is countable. With uncountable nouns, however, English also
uses an open class of words that are functionally similar to Chinese classifiers such
as ‘three cups of water’, ‘two pounds of coffee’ and ‘a herd of cattle’ etc. (Lehrer,
1986, p. 109).
According to Xiao (2006b), classifiers in Chinese are necessary in certain

contexts:
A. Grammatically mandatory
The classifier is mandatory in Chinese, the following example (a2) is
unacceptable:
a1) 三本书 a2) *三书
sān běn shu *sān shu
three CLF book three book
three books three books
B. Distinguishing between word senses
The same noun can be modified by different classifiers which can differentiate
word senses as in the following examples:
b1) 一条线 b2) 一根线
yı̄ tiáo xian yı̄ gēn xian
one CLF line one CLF thread
a line a thread
C. Resolving syntactic ambiguity
The classifier can resolve syntactic ambiguity as in the following examples:
c1) 贺老总给了他一把手枪
Hè lǎo zǒng gěi-le tā yı̀-bǎ shǒuqiāng
Hè general give-Asp him one-CLF pistol
General Ho gave him a pistol.
c2) 贺老总给了他一手枪
Hè lǎo zǒng gěi-le tā yı̀ shǒuqiāng
Hè general give-Asp him one pistol (CLF)
General Hè shot him once with a pistol.
All these examples show that the classifier is obligatory in Chinese, while it is
only required for noncount nouns in English. The number of English classifier
words is much smaller than that of Chinese classifier words. According to McEnery
and Xiao (2007), classifiers occur 29 times more frequently in Chinese than in
English. In this sense, Chinese can be regarded as a classifier language, while
English is a non-classifier language.
8.4 Classifier Constructions in Native and Translated Chinese 113
8.4 Classifier Constructions in Native and Translated

Chinese
This section compares the frequencies of classifiers and classifier constructions in

translated and non-translated Chinese to identify and explain any significant dif-
ference. We concordanced the classifiers that McEnery & Xiao (2007) indicate as
being used frequently in Chinese, i.e., Temporal classifier (qt), and Verbal classifier
(qv) in LCMC and ZCTC. We also concordanced all types of classifiers (tagged as
‘q’) in these two corpora. The results are presented in Table 8.2. The frequencies of
Temporal classifier (qt), Verbal classifier (qv) and the whole classifiers (tagged as
‘q’, include other types of classifiers including temporal classifier and verbal
classifier) are higher in LCMC than those in ZCTC.
We also concordanced the classifier constructions: ‘yi (one) + classifier’,
‘numeral/specifier + classifier’ (tagged as ‘mq’). The concordancing results indi-
cates that both the constructions use more frequently in ZCTC than in LCMC.
The classifier construction of ‘yi (one) + classifier’ is illustrated in Figs. 8.1
and 8.2.
Table 8.2 Classifiers in LCMC ZCTC LL Sig.

LCMC and ZCTC
qv 2898 2607 13.73 0.000
qt 3593 3537 0.17 0.678
q 16,695 16,157 5.93 0.015
yi + classifier 4683 5222 32.6 0.000
mq 4647 5868 149.36 0.000
Fig. 8.1 ‘yi + classifier’ construction in LCMC

Fig. 8.2 ‘yi + classifier’ construction in ZCTC
Fig. 8.3 ‘numeral / specifier + classifier’ (mq) in LCMC
The classifier construction of ‘numeral/specifier + classifier’ is illustrated in

Figs. 8.3 and 8.4.
Figures 8.3 and 8.4 show the numerals or specifiers in the construction of
‘numeral/specifier + classifier’ are ‘yi’ (one) in LCMC and ZCTC. The following
section discusses the construction of ‘yi (one) + classifier’ in native and translated
Chinese, focusing on ‘yi ge’.
8.5 ‘YI GE’ in Native and Translated Chinese 115
Fig. 8.4 ‘numeral / specifier + classifier’ (mq) in ZCTC
8.5 ‘YI GE’ in Native and Translated Chinese
The classifier construction of ‘Yi GE’ has attracted the attention of a number of
scholars. Cheung (1977) compared the indefinite articles ‘a, an’ in English and ‘YI
GE’(一个) in Chinese. He argued that both were similar, but that ‘YI Ge’ (一个) in
Chinese can simply express indefinite meaning, and that its main function is to mark
the existence of the noun phrase (as in sentence 5a), or to emphasize the modifier of
the noun phrase as in sentence 5b:
5a) 他是一个学者。
Tā shı̀ yı́gè xuézhě
3sg. be one-CLF scholar
He is a scholar.
5b) 他是一个在美国念书的人。
Tā shı̀ yı́gè zai měiguo nianshu de rén
3sg. be one-CLF in America study de person
He is a man who studies in America.
Hu (1982) argues that ‘YI GE’ (一个) in Chinese can be equal to English
non-definite articles (a, an) or numerals with the stress on ‘YI GE’ (一个) or not
in spoken Chinese.
6a) 我看到一个 ’人。
Wǒ kan dao yigè ’rén
1sg. see Aspect-marker one-CLF person
I saw a man.
Fig. 8.5 ‘YI GE’ (一个) in LCMC
6b) 我看到 ’一个人。
Wǒ kan dao ’yı́gè ren
1sg. see Aspect-marker one-CLF person
I saw one man.
But it is difficult to indicate the difference in written Chinese, so Hu (1982)
argues that if ‘yi’ (一one) is omitted in the structure of ‘一个’(numeral + classifier),
the remaining classifier can be considered to be equivalent to the English indefinite
articles:
7a) 我有把刀 (wǒ yǒu bǎ dāo): I have a knife.
7b) 我看到个人 (wǒ kandao ge rén): I saw a man.
7c) 我要借本书 (wǒ yao jiè běn shu): I want to borrow a book.
7d) 房子里有张 (fángzili yǒu zhāng zhuozi): There’s a table in the room. (Hu,
桌子 1982, pp. 118–119).
Other research on the classifier construction of ‘(yi) ge’ includes L€u (1984/
1999), Tsao (1978) and Wang (1984, 1990). According to L€u (1984/1999, p. 157),
‘(yi) ge’ can be used as an indefinite article. Tsao (1978) gives some examples of
some non-count nouns in the construction of ‘YI + Zhong’ (numeral + classifier) as
follows: ‘a kind of loneliness’; ‘a kind of graceful manner’ (Tsao, 1978, p. 49).
Wang (1984, pp. 341–343) agrees that ‘yi ge’, ‘yi zhong’ can be used as
indefinite articles and that they play an important role in the development of the
Chinese language. Wang (1990, p. 460) points out that many European languages
such as English, French and German have articles which earlier acted as a specific
kind of adjective. All the articles are used before nouns in the sentences and they
can mark the noun quality of the words after them, even if the words are not nouns
(such as the adjectives, indefinite verbs, gerunds, etc.). The words after the articles
can function as nouns.
The concordance results of ‘YI GE’ from LCMC and ZCTC are shown in
Figs. 8.5 and 8.6 respectively.
8.5 ‘YI GE’ in Native and Translated Chinese 117
Fig. 8.6 ‘YI GE’ (一个) in ZCTC
Table 8.3 ‘YI GE一个’ ZCTC LCMC

collocation in LCMC and
Node Freq Z-Score Node Freq Z-Score
ZCTC (left:0; right:2)
a 838 43.2 a 645 34.4
n 2259 34 n 1821 25.4
ude1 666 11.6 ude1 443 10.8
b 140 10.4 b 68 3.3
z 27 6.9 z 33 8
vl 46 4.5 uls 9 7.1
udh 2 3
The frequency of ‘YI GE’ in LCMC is 2841;while it is 3782 in ZCTC

(LL ¼ 139.73, p < 0.000). The translated Chinese texts use ‘YI GE’ more com-
monly than non-translated Chinese ones. As well as frequency, it is interesting to
consider the collocations of ‘YI GE’ in LCMC and ZCTC. Table 8.3 illustrates the
concordancing results of the collocations (the concordancing parameters are: left:
0, right: 2).
The table tells us most of the collocations of ‘YI GE’ in LCMC and ZCTC are
similar (such as ‘a’, ‘n’, ‘ude1’, ‘b’, ‘z’), though the frequencies are different. The
translated Chinese follows the norms of native Chinese, and it is the result of the
normalization tendency in translation. If we change the concordancing parameter,
i.e., left: 0, right: 1, we obtain the results as illustrated in Table 8.4.
Table 8.4 shows the collocations of the classifier construction ‘YI GE’ in LCMC
and ZCTC. Most of the collocations of ‘YI GE’ in translated Chinese follow the
norms of native Chinese (such as ‘a’, ‘n’, ‘b’, ‘z’, ‘vl’), and so can be regarded as a
normalization tendency in translation. However, the translated Chinese still shows
the different characteristics from non-translated in the collocations of ‘YI GE’.
Table 8.4 ‘YI GE一个’ collocation in LCMC and ZCTC (left:0; right:1)
ZCTC LCMC
Node Freq Z-Score Freq Z-Score
a (adjective) 640 52.2 508 44
n (noun) 1728 50.8 1381 40.5
b (distinguishing words) 121 16.8 21 7.8
z (zhuangtaici: state expressions) 20 8.2 55 6.7
vl (verb phrase) 39 7.8 23 3.3
nl (noun phrase) 13 4.3
bl (distinguishing phrase) 6 3.4
Table 8.4 shows that ‘YI GE’ in translated Chinese can collocate with the ‘noun
phrases’ (nl) and ‘distinguishing phrases’ (bl) with high Z-score.
For example:
The noun phrases (nl) in ZCTC:
8) 孤寂是这些人尚未拥有的一个自然资源, 到目前为止, 惟有鸟类学者和鹤
认识孤寂的价值。(Solitude, one natural resource)
In English, ‘one natural resource’ is acceptable, while the Chinese
‘yı́gèzı̀ránzı̄yuán’ (一个自然资源: one + CLF + noncountable noun) sounds unnat-
ural and strange.
The distinguishing phrases (bl) in ZCTC:
9) 这是一个强有力的防守打法,如果你来不及打一个好的上旋球时,这种打
法能帮助你摆脱困境。(English version underlined: This is a best defensive
play.)
The distinguishing word ‘best’ in English can be translated into Chinese as
‘qiángyǒulı̀’ (强有力).
All these examples show that ‘YI GE’ can used as a noun marker in the sentence.
Its main function is not to express the numeral meanings, but to mark the noun after
its position. That is to say, we can judge the components after (on the right) ‘YI GE’
must be a noun (the noun may be modified by other kinds of words, such as
adjective, prepositions or preposition phrases, etc.).
Concordance results can also indicate recurrent patterns before – that is, on the
left – of ‘YI GE’, and display any differences between the two corpora. The
concordancing results show a sharp difference between the comparable corpora.
Figures 8.7 and 8.8 illustrate the collocations of ‘YI GE’ in ZCTC and LCMC
respectively.
In LCMC, only the verb ‘shi’(是) is used before ‘YI GE’, while there are many
kinds of words that appear immediately to the left of ‘YI GE’ in ZCTC, such as ‘rz’
(deictic pronouns), ‘vyou’ (verb of ‘you’有), ‘v’ (general verbs), ‘p’ (prepositions),
‘vf’ (directional verbs), ‘ule’ (aspect marker ‘le’ 了), ‘uguo’ (aspect marker ‘guo’
过), and ‘ude1’ (auxiliary word ‘de’ 的), etc. These items also have high frequen-
cies and z-scores.
8.6 ‘YI GE’ in English-Chinese Parallel Corpus 119
Fig. 8.7 ‘YI GE’

Collocations in ZCTC (left
1, right 0)
Fig. 8.8 ‘YI GE’

Collocations in LCMC (left
1, right 0)
Although there exist sharp differences in the collocations of ‘YI GE’ in LCMC
and ZCTC, they both share one collocation, that is ‘vshi’ (verb of ‘shi’是), which
has a high frequency in each corpus (LCMC 294: ZCTC435). This syntactic
phenomenon will be discussed further in Chap. 10.
8.6 ‘YI GE’ in English-Chinese Parallel Corpus
The results discussed in the preceding section show a tendency for the translated
Chinese to use more classifier constructions than non-translated Chinese, and most
of them are the construction of ‘yi (one) + classifier’. We now consider reasons for
the higher frequencies in ZCTC than in LCMC.
Fig. 8.9 The most important noun classes in English (Quirk et al. 1985, p. 247)
When we check the phenomenon in a parallel corpus, we find that the parallel
concordancing results show that the source English language uses more of the
numeral ‘one’, singular articles (especially the indefinite article, i.e., ‘a’ and ‘an’),
and specifiers (‘this’ and ‘that’).
Specifiers of ‘this’ can be translated into Chinese as ‘thè + (yi) + gè’ (这一个 this
one) while ‘that’ can be translated into Chinese as ‘na + (yi) + gè’ (那一个that one).
According to Quirk et al (1985), the indefinite article ‘a, an’ can be regarded as
an unstressed numeral, equivalent to the stressed ‘one’ (Quirk et al., 1985,
pp. 253–254). The indefinite article derives historically from the unstressed form
of ‘one’, and in present-day English there are still many contexts in which this
numerical function is uppermost. Thus ‘one’ could be substituted as a slightly
emphatic equivalent of ‘a’ in the following coordinate constructions: a mile or
two (one or two miles); The Wrights have two daughters and a son; a foot and a half
of water (one and a half feet) (Quirk et al., 1985, p. 273).
The following are other examples in which ‘one’ could replace ‘a’ or ‘an’, and
where the adjective ‘single’ can add an intensifying force to the indefinite article
(or “one”):
Mungo can walk forty miles in a (single) day.
They didn’t stop talking for a (single) moment.
There’s not a (single) pickled onion in the house.
In addition to being a numeral, a/an also has substitute and generic functions,
and it can also mark the noun. Different functions depend on different contexts, a/
an before countable nouns can function as numeral. In English, the common nouns
can be divided into count and noncount nouns as Fig. 8.9.
In English, both count and noncount nouns can enter partitive constructions,
i.e. constructions denoting a part of a whole. Such constructions express both
quality partition (e.g.: a kind of paper) and quantity partition (e.g.: a piece of
Table 8.5 Noncount nouns Singular partitives Plural partitives

A new kind of computer new kinds of computers
A delicious sort of bread delicious sorts of bread
Another type of research other types of research
Quirk et al. (1985), p. 249
Table 8.6 BNC word list N Word Freq. % Texts %

5 A 2,181,592 2.19 4045 99.78
8 THAT 1,052,259 1.06 4026 99.31
23 THIS 454,419 0.46 4004 98.77
33 AN 338,743 0.34 3942 97.24
38 ONE 290,466 0.29 3937 97.11
paper). Quality partition is expressed by a partitive count noun like kind, sort, or
type followed by an of-phrase, as illustrated in Table 8.5:
In English, the cardinal numeral ‘one’ may be regarded as a stressed form of the
indefinite article and may sometimes replace it as the following sentence: “I would
like a/one photocopy of this article”. ‘a/an + count noun’ is the common usage in
English, and its equivalent in Chinese is ‘Yi + classifier + count noun’ (一 + 量词
+ 可数名词). For example:
(10a) <s n¼“L1E_0045”> And we had to find a way so that they could cross a
bridge without humiliation. </s>
(10b) <s n¼“L2C_0045”> 我们曾经必须找到一个方法, 使他们能够过
桥而不丢失面子。 </s>
(11a) <s n¼“L1E_2349”> Sally did not know she had married a poet as well as a
farmer. </s>
(11b) <s n¼“L2C_2349”> 萨莉没有想到, 她嫁给了一个农民, 也嫁给了
一个诗人。 </s>
(12a) <s n¼“L1E_0168”> and I sat with my back close to a dune, while Susan
kept to the shoreline, staring out to sea or looking about for interesting
shells or stones. </s>
(12b) <s n¼“L2C_0168”> 我紧靠一堆沙丘坐下, 苏珊则靠近岸边, 一会
儿凝望大海, 一会儿在四周寻找有趣的贝壳或石子。 </s>
The following BNC word list shows the most frequent words in English
(Table 8.6): they are ‘a’ (the 5th), ‘that’ (the 8th), ‘this’ (the 23rd), ‘an’ (the
33rd), and ‘one’ (the 38th).
In the English-Chinese translation process, the numerals ‘one’, indefinite articles
‘a/an’, and specifiers ‘this/that’ can be translated into Chinese ‘一 + 量词’ (one
+ classifier) as in the following sentence:
13) She is an excellent teacher in the school.
在这学校里,她是一名优秀的老师。
Fig. 8.10 ‘a’/ ‘an’ (AT1) in Babel parallel corpus
We concordanced the parallel corpus Babel for the translation of these words
(‘a’, ‘an’, ‘this’, ‘that’, ‘one’ which are tagged as ‘AT1’, ‘AT1’, ‘DD1’, ‘DD1’,
‘MC1’ respectively within the CLAWS tagset).
Figure 8.10 illustrates the concordancing results of ‘AT1’ (a, an) in the Babel
corpus:
We find that the most of the instances of the English articles ‘a’ and ‘an’ are
translated into ‘YI GE’, for example:
14a) <s n¼“L1E_0007”> And this must be achieved in a rapidly globalizing
world.
14b) <s n¼“L2C_0007”> 而这必须在一个迅速全球化的世界里进行。
15a) <s n¼“L1E_0010”> The vision expressed in the idea Of African renais-
sance is that of the reconstruction and development of an Africa in which
people ’s lives are constantly and rapidly improving towards standards
broadly in line with the best in the world .. </s>
15b) <s n¼“L2C_0010”> 非洲复兴的理想, 就是建设和发展一个人民
生活迅速不断改善的非洲, 使他们的生活水平达到和世界最高
水平大体相当。 </s>
We now turn to a consideration of ‘one’. Figure 8.11 presents the concordancing
results of ‘MC1’(one) in the Babel parallel corpus:
Most occurrences of ‘one’ are also rendered as ‘YI GE’ in translated Chinese:
16a) <s n¼“L1E_0027”> In_II our_APPGE interdependent_JJ modern_JJ
world_NN1 what_DDQ happens_VVZ in_II one_MC1 country_NN1
impacts_NN2 on_II many_DA2 others_NN2 ._. </s>
Fig. 8.11 ‘one’ (MC1) in Babel parallel corpus
16b) <s n¼“L2C_0027”> 在_p 我们_r 现代_t 这个_r 相互_d 依存_v 的_u 世
界_n 中_f, _w 一个_m 国家_n 里_f 发生_v 的_u 事_n 影响_v 到_v 旁_f
的_u 许多_m 国家_n 。_w </s>
17a) <s n¼“L1E_0110”> Then_RT one_MC1 spring_NN1 Saturday_NPD1
two_MC years_NNT2 later_RRR,_, I_PPIS1 entered_VVD a_AT1
bookstore_NN1 in_II Philadelphia_NP1 and_CC asked_VVD a_AT1
young_JJ woman_NN1 on_II a_AT1 ladder_NN1 where_RRQ I_PPIS1
might_VM find_VVI the_AT Shakespeare_NP1 sonnets_NN2 I_PPIS1
needed_VVD for_IF an_AT1 English_JJ class_NN1 ._. </s>
17b) <s n¼“L2C_0110”> 两_m 年_q 以后_f 一个_m 春天_t 的_u 星期六_t,
_w 我_r 走_v 进_v 了_u 费城_ns 的_u 一_m 家_q 书店_n, _w 向_p 站_v
在_p 梯子_n 上_f 的_u 一_m 位_q 年轻_a 姑娘_n 询问_v, _w 在_p 哪儿
_r 可以_v 找_v 到_v 我_r 上_v 英语_nz 课_n 需要_v 的_u 莎士比亚_nr
的_u 十四行诗_l 。_w </s>
These structural differences are obvious in translations from English into Chi-
nese because of the way that classifier constructions are over-represented in trans-
lated Chinese (normally the classifiers are not required in English). Figure 8.12
illustrates the concordancing results of ‘YI + GE’ (一个)in the English-Chinese
parallel corpus, Babel.
The source language in Babel is English. The total concordancing result of ‘Yi
GE’ in Babel is 1138, but we limited the number of concordance lines to 500 for
analysis. Based on the analysis of this large sample, the occurrences can be
classified into the following groups according to their translations into English
(see Table 8.7).
Fig. 8.12 ‘YI GE’ in BABEL parallel corpus
Table 8.7 ‘YI GE’ and its YI GE (一个) English original Frequency
English Originals in the Babel
a/an (+adj.) + noun 301
Corpus
another 25
one + noun 21
the noun 20
one 18
any / no /anyone/someone 13
every / every one /everyone 12
(the) best /first /last 11
one of the pl. 11
(the) next 10
each 6
Table 8.6 shows that ‘a/an (adj.) + noun’ are overwhelmingly the most common
equivalents of ‘YI GE’, followed by ‘another, one + noun, the noun, one’, etc. Here
are some examples from the parallel concordancing results.
1) ‘YI GE’ equals to ‘a/an + (adj.) noun’
(18a) <s n¼“L1E_3255”> Terman and many other early advocates of IQ testing
had in mind the creation of an American meritocracy, though the word did
n’t exist then.
(18b) <s n¼“L2C_3255”> 特曼和许多早期拥护智商测试的人们都想

到了创造一个精英统治的美国社会, 尽管当时并没有 “ meri-
tocracy “ 这个词。 </s>
(19a) <s n¼“L1E_0250”> I pictured the palm tree as something with feeling,
something possessed of a heart that throbbed. </s>
(19b) <s n¼“L2C_0250”> 我把椰枣树想象成一个带有情感的生命, 一
个有颗跳动的心的生命。 </s>
(20a) <s n¼“L1E_3907”> Students seized on the ideal knocking on doors,
throughout Eastbourne after school in search of sponsors to pledge a small
sum for each word the pupils could spell correctly. </s>
(20b) <s n¼“L2C_3907”> 学生们立即采用这个好主意, 放学后在伊斯
特本挨家挨户敲门寻找赞助人保证为小学生能准确拼读出的
每一个单词出一笔小小的费用。 </s>
2) ‘Another’ in English includes the meaning of ‘YI GE’
(21a) <s n¼“L1E_0655”> This natural selection of mutations was first proposed
by another Cambridge man, Charles Darwin, in 1857, though he did n’t
know the mechanism for it. </s>
(21b) <s n¼“L2C_0655”> 突变的自然选择是由另一个剑桥人查尔斯 ·
达尔文于 1857年首先提出的, 尽管他并不知道其机制。
(22a) <s n¼“L1E_3201”> They take organs from one body and integrate them
into another, granting the lucky recipient a longer, better life. </s>
(22b) <s n¼“L2C_3201”> 他们从一个人体中取出器官并把它们植入
另一个人体内, 使幸运的接受移植者有一个更长更好的生命。
</s>
3) Every/everyone/every one
(23a) <s n¼“L1E_2180”> They were so very different in every respect: </s>
(23b) <s n¼“L2C_2180”> 他们在每一个方面都与其他民族不同 : </s>
(24a) <s n¼“L1E_1348”> A writer--in fact every one of us in life--needs that
mother force, the loving force from which all creation flows; </s>
(24b) <s n¼“L2C_1348”> 一个作家 - 其实生活中的每一个人 - 需要一
股来自母亲的力量, 所有创作都源于爱的力量 ; </s>
(25a) <s n¼“L1E_0391”> That night, everyone kept looking at me. </s>
(25b) <s n¼“L2C_0391”> 那天晚上, 家里每一个人都不停地瞧着我。
</s>
(26a) <s n¼“L1E_0482”> A 1924 Time cover story on Baekeland reported that
those familiar with Bakelite ’s potential “claim that in a few years it will be
embodied in every mechanical facility of modern civilization”. </s>
(26b) <s n¼“L2C_0482”> 1924年以贝克兰为封面的一期 hh 时代 ii 杂志
的封面人物故事报道说, 那些知晓酚醛潜力的人 “ 声称再过几
年它就会体现在现代文明的每一个机械设备上 “ 。 </s>
4) Any
(27a) <s n¼“L1E_1284”> Something says the public would no more want a
substitute for the first-born of the millennium than any parent would
replace a baby. </s>
(27b) <s n¼“L2C_1284”> 可以说, 公众并不要一个千禧第一婴儿的替
代者, 正如任何一个父母都不会让自己的孩子被替换掉。
(28a) <s n¼“L1E_4768”> An angry athlete is an athlete who will make mis-
takes, as any coach will tell you. </s>
(29b) <s n¼“L2C_4768”> 任何一个教练员都会对你说, 运动员一生气
就会犯错误。 </s>
5) The + (last/best/first, etc.) + Noun
(30a) <s n¼“L1E_3444”> eight open-air performances will take place in

Taimiao, the oldest ancestral temple just outside the ancient city ’s Imperial
Palace, where the last emperor, Pu Yi, was wed in 1924 ( and where the
New Age musician Yanni performed in 1997 ). </s>
(30b) <s n¼“L2C_3444”> 八场露天演出将在太庙进行, 那是古城是宫
外的一个古代庙宇, 1924年末代皇帝博仪就是在那儿举行婚礼
的 ( 那里也是新时代音乐家雅尼 1997年来华演出的场地 ) 。 </
s>
(31a) <s n¼“L1E_4301”> The UK has become the latest country after the us
and Germany to join an international battle for scarce high-tech workers by
relaxing its work permit rules for overseas specialists. </s>
(31b) <s n¼“L2C_4301”> 继美国和德国之后, 英国最近放松了对海外
专门人才的工作限制, 成了加入稀缺的高科技人才争夺战的
又一个国家。 </s>
(32a) <s n¼“L1E_1310”> “Imagine, we would have finished the picture
tonight, “ my father was shouting. “Instead that moron suddenly gets it into
her beautiful empty, little head that she can’t play the last scene. </s>
(32b) <s n¼“L2C_1310”> “ 想想看, 我们今晚本可以拍完那部电影, “ 父
亲吼道, “ 可是那个空长了个漂亮小脑袋的蠢婆娘突然冒出了
个怪念头, 说她演不了最后一个镜头。 </s>
(33a) <s n¼“L1E_5088”> I was in fourth grade when I told my first real joke. </s>
(33b) <s n¼“L2C_5088”> 我读四年级的时候第一次讲了一个真正的
笑话。 </s>
(34a) <s n¼“L1E_3111”> BlueMountain.com is the best known, with 2,000
e-cards available and 11 million monthly visitors to its site. </s>
(34b) <s n¼“L2C_3111”> BlueMountain.com 是最著名的一个网站, 随时
备有 2000 种电子贺卡, 每月有 1100万网友访问。 </s>
6) The + noun(s)
(35a) <s n¼“L1E_0024”> Nor is it to ignore the fact that some of our problems
are of our own making as we know from the record of the first decades of
independence. </s>
(35b) <s n¼“L2C_0024”> 也不是忽略一个事实, 即有些困难是我们自己
造成的, 这一点从独立最初几十年的记录中我们可以看出。 </s>
7) No + noun
(36a) <s n¼“L1E_3239”> No country embraced the IQ--and the application of

IQ testing to restructure society--more thoroughly than the U.S. </s>
(36b) <s n¼“L2C_3239”> 没有一个国家像美国那样完全彻底地接受智
商 - 以及运用智商测试去重建社会。 </s>
(37a) <s n¼“L1E_4397”> Dodi was no playboy, Rees-Jones concluded. He
never saw him take cocaine</s>
(37b) <s n¼“L2C_4397”> 里斯一琼斯认为, 多迪不是一个花花公子, 他从
没有见过多迪吸毒
8) One. . .the other/One. . .another
(38a) <s n¼“L1E_1223”> and the other was the kindly, poverty-stricken artist
for whom her sympathetic heart had interceded only this morning. </s>
(38b) <s n¼“L2C_1223”> 另一个就是那位和善的穷画家, 今天上午她
那颗温柔的心还为他送情呢。 </s>
(39a) <s n¼“L1E_3814”> One test followed another. </s>
(39b) <s n¼“L2C_3814”> 检查一个接着一个。 </s>
(40a) <s n¼“L1E_1453”> Even his recreation consisted in change of study,
laying down one subject to take up another. </s>
(40b) s n¼“L2C_1453”> 连他的消遣都是放下一个科目又拿起另一个
科目的变换研究。 </s>
9) One. . .next
(41a) <s n¼“L1E_3317”> Tradition says that the one who catches the bouquet
will be the next to marry. </s>
(41b) <s n¼“L2C_3317”> 相传抓到花束的女孩会成为下一个结婚的
人。 </s>
10) Someone / anyone
(42a) <s n¼“L1E_4973”> “ If your car breaks down, you will be there for days
before anyone passes by and it is terribly hot. </s>
(43b) <s n¼“L2C_4973”> “ 如果车于发生故障, 你会几天呆在那里碰
不上一个人, 而且天气又酷热难当。 </s>
11) Others Types of Equivalents
(44a) <s n¼“L1E_1775”> These are the times of fast foods and slow digestion;
tall men and short character ; steep profits and shallow relationships . </s>
(44b) <s n¼“L2C_1775”> 这是一个快餐食品和消化迟缓相伴的时代 ;
一个体格高大和性格病态并存的时代 ; 一个追名逐利和人情冷
漠相生的时代。 </s>
(45a) <s n¼“L1E_0966”> Once the bug of movie stardom bites, it ’s hard to let
it go.
(45b) <s n¼“L2C_0966”> 一旦作电影明星的梦想开始噬咬一个人的
心, 人们是不会轻易放弃的。 </s>
(46a) <s n¼“L1E_1478”> When afterwards replying in succession to the argu-
ments of his parliamentary opponents--an art in which he was perhaps
unrivalled. </s>
(46b) <s n¼“L2C_1478”> 后来在议会上应对对手一个接一个的争论
时 - 他在这门技艺上也许是无人可比的 </s>
The concordancing results also tell us that ‘YI GE’ is used in translated Chinese
when there are no articles used in the English source text. The translators add ‘YI
GE’ according to the norms of the target Chinese language, and this addition results
in the over-representation of ‘YI GE’ in translated Chinese.
There even exist some strange collocations of ‘YI GE’ in translated Chinese
according to the norms of non-translated Chinese.
(47a) <s n¼“L1E_5246”> I was playing in a puddle after a rainstorm and
suddenly felt a huge weight on my feet. </s>
(47b) <s n¼“L2C_5246”> 一场暴雨之后, 我在道上的一个水坑里玩, 突
然间感到一个很大的重量压在我的两脚上。 </s>
In the example, 一个很大的重量 ‘yı́gè hěnda de zhòngliang’(one-CLF very
huge De weight) is strange or unacceptable in Chinese, for the 重量‘zhongliang’ is
an uncountable noun in Chinese and so normally should not collocate with ‘YI GE’.
As mentioned in the preceding section of the present Chapter, Tsao (1978) argues
that when ‘YI GE’ collocates with non-count nouns, this should be categorized as
an example of hybridity in Chinese.
On examining data from the corpus further, we find that ‘YI GE’ construction in
translated Chinese can be divided into four classes: ‘YI + GE + countable noun’,
‘YI + GE + abstract noun’, ‘YI + GE + verb/adjective’ and ‘YI + GE + complex
phrases’. The combination of source language interference and target language
normalization lead to the hybridity of ‘YI GE’ in translated Chinese.
8.7 Explanation of the Prevalence of Classifier Constructions in Chinese 129
Table 8.8 The noun phrase typology (Gil, 1987, p. 256)

Typological Correlate Type A Type B
1. Obligatory marking of (in)definiteness + –
2. Obligatory marking of nominal plurality + –
3. Obligatory marking of numeral classification – +
4. Existence of adnominal distributive numerals – +
5. Free NP-internal constituent order – +
6. Existence of stacked adnominal numeral – +
7. Existence of hierarchic interpretations of stacked + –
Adjective construction
8.7 Explanation of the Prevalence of Classifier

Constructions in Chinese
According to Gil (1987), languages vary considerably with respect to their strate-
gies for marking (in)definiteness. Some languages use both definite and indefinite
articles obligatorily (Type A languages), while some languages (Type B languages)
only use definite articles obligatorily, the indefinite article being either optional
(cf. Gil, 1987, pp. 254–255). English as a representative of a Type A language, is
different from Chinese which is a language of Type B. The difference may be
illustrated in Table 8.8.
As pointed out at the previous section of the present chapter, English and
Chinese are different from each other in their distinctive use of numeral classifier
systems. The difference can be a direct consequence of the count-mass parameter
put forward by Gil (1987).
Since count nouns come with a ‘natural’ unit for enumeration, Type A languages,
possessing count nouns, do not require a numeral classifier specifying such a unit. While
mass nouns, however, have no such natural units, hence, Type B languages, possessing only
mass nouns, must make use of a numeral classifier in order to establish appropriate units for
enumeration (ibid., p. 258).
Nominalization is a basic morphological process or syntactic mechanism in

English which transfers a verb or adjective into a noun. The main method of
nominalization is adding an affix to a verb or adjective, and the morphological
conversion can realize the nominalization process in English (Qu, 2005,
pp. 319–320). However, the Chinese verbs or adjectives will use new words if
they change into nouns, such as the adjective ‘cōngmı́ng’ (聪明: wise) has to
change into ‘cōnghuı̀’ (聪慧: intelligence) or ‘zhı̀huı̀’ (智慧: intelligence) as
a noun.
In translating into Chinese the English nouns which have been formed from a
verb or adjective by nominalization, a translator will use the verb or adjective to
translate the nouns. So the construction of ‘YI + Classifier + Verb / Adjective’ is
common in translated Chinese (see Ma, 2010, p. 80). We investigated this
construction from English-Chinese parallel corpora, such as Babel, GCEPC,

MECPC (see Chap. 5), and found many examples, such as:
48a) <s n¼"1321"> What mattered were individual relationships, and a
completely helpless gesture, an embrace, a tear, a word spoken to a dying
man, could have value in itself.
48b) <s n¼"1321"> 他们_r 重视_v 个人_n 的_u 关系_n 。_w 一个_m 完全
_ad 没有_v 用处_n 的_u 姿态_n, _w 一个_m 拥抱_v, _w 一_m 滴_q 眼泪
_n, _w 对_p 将_d 死_v 的_u 人_n 说_v 一_m 句_q 话_n, _w 都_d 有_v 本
身_r 的_u 价值_n 。
49a) <s n¼"6"> That Cézanne could explore such complex problems without
sacrificing the quality of his art is an index of his genius. </s>
49b) <s n¼"6"> 塞尚_nr 在_p 不_d 牺牲_v 其_r 艺术_n 本质_n 的_u 条件_n
下_f 探索_v 这样_r 复杂_a 的_u 问题_n, _w 是_v 他_r 天才_n 的_u 一个
_m 表现_v 。
The ‘an embrace’ in sentence (48a) is translated into ‘yı́gè yōngbao’(一个拥抱:
YI + CLF + verb), and ‘an index’ in sentence (49a) is translated into ‘yı́gè biǎoxian’
(一个表现: YI + CLF + verb). The hybrid construction of ‘YI + Classifier + Verb /
Adjective’ reflects the influence of the English source language in the translation
processes; such constructions were considered unacceptable when they appeared in
Chinese, but they have been accepted by the reader over time. In the Chinese
language development process, some verbs can be used as nouns, such as the words
‘tǐxian’(体现), ‘yǎnxı́’ (演习), ‘gǎishan’ (改善) in the following examples:
50) <s n¼"5"> 这_r 次_q 你们_r 亲属_n 团聚_v 是_v 一_m 件_q 喜事_n, _w
是_v 我们_r 民族_n 大团结_n 的_u 一个_m 体现_v, _w 一个_m 演习_vn
。_w </s>
51) <s n¼"15"> 我们_r 要_v 把_p 经验_n 好好_d 总结_v 一下_m, _w 使_v
这_r 方面_n 工作_vn 来_f 一个_m 改善_v 。_w </s>
8.8 Conclusions
The present chapter first defined the classifier in Chinese, and demonstrated how the
categories of the classifier system in Chinese are different from English. It reviewed
the major categories of classifier in Chinese, and pointed out that the classifier is
obligatory in Chinese, and Chinese can be regarded as a classifier-prominent
language compared to English.
The chapter then focused on the classifier and its constructions in translated
Chinese and the analysis drew upon qualitative and quantitative methods from a
synchronic perspective.
The case study of classifiers focused on ‘YI GE’. The corpus evidence suggests
that it is a feature of hybridity in translated Chinese that the construction has formed
References 131
into ‘Yi + ge + countable noun’, ‘Yi + ge + abstract noun’, ‘Yi + ge + verb/adjective’

and ‘Yi + ge + complex phrases’.
The chapter investigated the English equivalents of ‘YI GE’ in English-Chinese
parallel corpus, and ended by offering a tentative explanations for the prevalence of
classifier constructions in Chinese.
References
Allan, K. 1977. Classifier. Language 53(2): 285–311.

California Press.
Cheung, H. 1977. A study on the use of Yige. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers
Association 12(1): 2–7.
Crystal, D. 2008. A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics, 6th ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Ding, S., S. L€u, and R. Li et al. 1961/1999. Xiandai Hanyu Yufa Jianghua (Talks on Modern
Chinese Grammar). Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [丁声树,吕叔湘,李荣,等. (1961/1999).
hh现代汉语语法讲话ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
Gil, D. 1987. Definiteness, noun phrase configurationality, and the count-mass distinction. In The
representation of (In)defniteness, ed. E.J. Reuland and A.G.B.T. Meulen, 254–269. Cam-
bridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hu, Z. 1982. Guowai Hanying Duibi Yanjiu Zatan 2 (Talks on Chinese-English contrastive studies
in foreign countries: 2). Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies, (2), 117–128. [胡壮麟.
(1982). 国外汉英对比研究杂谈(二、续完). hh语言教学与研究ii,(2), 117–128.]
Lehrer, A. 1986. English classifier constructions. Lingua 68: 109–148.
u, S. 1984/1999. Hanyu Yufa Lunwenji (Zengdingben)(Essays on Chinese Grammar, Revised
L€
Edition). Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [吕叔湘. (1984/1999). hh汉语语法论文集ii(增订本).
modern Chinese, Doctoral dissertation). Anhui University. [马春华. (2010). hh现代汉语欧化
McEnery, T., and R. Xiao. 2007. Quantifying constructions in English and Chinese: A corpus-
based contrastive study. Paper presented at the proceedings of corpus linguistics 2007,
28–30 July 2007, Birmingham University.
Qu, C. 2005. Hanyu Renzhi Gongneng Yufa (A cognitive-functional grammar of Mandarin
Chinese). Ha’erbin: Heilongjiang Renmin Chubanshe. [屈承熙. (2005). hh汉语认知功能语
法ii. 哈尔滨: 黑龙江人民出版社.]
Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech, and J. Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the
English language. London/New York: Longman.
Ross, C., and J.S. Ma. 2006. Modern mandarin Chinese grammar: A practical guide. London:
Routledge.
Tai, J.H. 1992. Variation in classifier systems across Chinese dialects: Towards a cognition-based
semantic approach. Chinese Languages and Linguistics (1): 587–608.
Tai, J.H. 1994. Chinese classifier systems and human categorization. In In honor of William S.-Y.
Wang: Interdisciplinary studies on language and language change, ed. W.S.-Y. Wang,
M.Y. Chen, and O.J.L. Tzeng, 1–19. Taipei: Pyramid Press.
volume 1, Chinese grammar theory). Jinan: Shandong Edecation Press. [王力. (1984). hh王力
Wang, L. 1990. Wang Li Wenji Dishiyijuan: Hanyu Yufashi, Hanyu Cihuishi (The complete works
of Wang Li, volume 11, A history of Chinese grammar and vocabulary). Jinan: Shandong
Edecation Press. [王力. (1990). hh王力文集(第11卷)汉语语法史;汉语词汇史ii. 济南: 山东教
育出版社.]
Xiao, R. 2006. Using corpora to study classifiers in Mandarin Chinese. Paper presented at the
paper presented at COST Action A31: Stability and adaptation of classification systems in a
cross-cultural perspective, Berlin, Germany.
Chapter 9
Light Verbs in Translated Chinese
Abstract This chapter focuses on the light verbs, which related to nominalization,
and their hybridity features in translated Chinese, using parallel and comparable
corpora as an evidence base. It first introduces the difference between Chinese and
English in light verbs, then the different frequencies in translated and native
Chinese. It focuses on the different usage of light verbs in translated and native
Chinese. The findings include: (1) The light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’(进行 proceed) used
more frequently in translated Chinese than that in original Chinese. (2) Most of the
collocation categories of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in translated original Chinese are the same,
such as gerund, adjective, distinguishing words etc., which are in accordance with
the requirements of modern written Chinese discussed by Zhu (1985), L€u (1999)
and Diao (2004). This is the normalization effect in translation and the translated
Chinese is influenced by the norm of the target original Chinese. (3) The usages and
collocations of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ also display the different features in translated Chinese: it
can collocate with the aspect markers of ‘zhe’(着 which means the progressing of
an action or event) and ‘guo’(过 which means the completeness of an action or
event) with high frequencies and Z-scores. The usages and collocations violate the
grammatical rules pointed out by L€u (1999) and Zhu (1985), etc. The collocations
such as ‘English character strings’ and ‘transcription of geographic names’ can be
the effect of ‘source language shining through’ in translation process. (4) The
increasing frequencies of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ both in translated and original Chinese within
diachronic comparable corpus show the tendency of abstraction and nominalization
of the light verb constructions. (5) Four categories equivalents of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in
English make the light verb use widely in translated Chinese than that in the
original Chinese. The article also suggests the translating methods for the
light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ with the help of parallel corpus data.
9.1 Introduction: Light Verbs in English and Chinese
Light verbs are a common language phenomenon in many languages, such as

Chinese, English, Japanese, German, etc. It is generally credited with first coining
the term ‘light verb’ for the English ‘Verb þ Noun Phrase’ constructions such as

DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-0742-2_9
134 9 Light Verbs in Translated Chinese
‘have a rest’, and ‘give a shout’. Since then, the term ‘light verb’ has been extended
to cover ‘Verb þ Verb’ constructions in a variety of languages (Butt and Geuder
(2001, p. 323)).
A light verb construction (LVC) is a verb-complement pair in which the verb has
little lexical meaning (is “light”) and much of the semantic content of the construc-
tion is obtained from the complement (Tan et al. 2006). In other words, the verb has
little or no semantic content of its own but it combines with a (usually indefinite)
direct object noun or NP which itself expresses a verbal meaning. The direct object
nouns or NPs have a similar function of ‘EVENTIVE object’ put forward by Quirk
et al. (1985, p. 750). The ‘EVENTIVE object’ is a frequent type of object generally
taking the form of a deverbal noun preceded by a common verb of general meaning,
such as do, give, have, make, take. The deverbal nouns are the nouns derived from
verbs or verb phrases and functioning as nouns, not verbs; for example, ‘walk’ is a
deverbal noun in the construction ‘take a walk’.
This EVENTIVE object is semantically an extension of the verb and bears the
major part of the meaning. The more frequent eventive object can sometimes be
related to a cognate object in that it substitutes for the major lexical meaning of the
verb whereas the cognate object repeats the lexical meaning.
They fought for a long time. [verb þ adverbial]
They fought a long fight. [verb þ cognate object]
They had a long fight.[verb þ eventive object] (Quirk et al. 1985, pp. 750–751).
Light verbs may also be regarded as semantically empty support verbs, which
share their arguments with a noun. Semantically, a light verb is impoverished and
may contribute information about event shape (eg, beginning or ending of an
event), but specifies little about the kind of event under description. The event, ie
the predicative content of a light verb construction, mainly comes from the event-
denoting element that is taken as complement by the light verb. For instance, in the
Chinese light verb construction ‘jı̀nxı́ng shāngtǎo’ (进行商讨:proceed a discuss),
the event of discussion is denoted by the complement ‘shāngtǎo’ (discuss), whereas
the light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ (proceed) indicates a process aspect of the event (Huang and
Lin 2013, p. 728).
According to Zhu (1985), Chinese has a set of light verbs (‘weak verbs’,‘dummy
verbs’) which include ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ (进行proceed), ‘jiāyǐ’ (加以give), ‘gěiyǔ’ (给予
give), ‘yúyǐ’ (予以give), and ‘zuò’ (作do), etc. (Zhu 1985, p. 86).
For example:
(1) tāmen huā le zhěngzhěng yı̀nián shı́jiān jı̀nxı́ng diaochá.
他们花了整整一年时间进行调查
They spend aspect-marker a year time proceed investigation
whole
‘They spent a year in investigation.’
(2) guānyú máod

un de tèshuxı̀ng wèntı́ yı̀ngdāng zhuozhòng de
关于矛盾的特殊性问题应当着重地
about antinomy DE particularity problem should seriously DE
9.1 Introduction: Light Verbs in English and Chinese 135
jiāyǐ yánjı̄u, bı̀ng yòng zúgòu de piānfú jiāyǐ shuōmı́ng.

加以研究, 并用足够的篇幅加以说明。
give investigate and take enough DE space give explanation
‘We should investigate the particular problems of the antinomy carefully, and explain it at
great length.’
(3) duı̀yú zhèzhǒng sǔnhuai gōngwu de xı́ngwéi yı̀ngdāng

对于这种损坏公物的行为应当
for this kind of destroy public property DE behaviour should
gěiyǐ pı̄pı́ng
给以批评
Give criticize
‘The behaviour of destroying the public property should be criticized.’
(4) shǒu’ è fènzi bı̀xu yúyǐ chéngban

首恶分子必须予以惩办
chief criminal must give punishment
‘The chief criminal must be punished.’
(5) liǎnggu o zhèngfǔ jiāng cǎiqǔ guǒduan

两国政府将采取果断
two countries government will take decisive
cuòshı̄ yǔ kǒngbuzhǔyı̀ zuò dòuzhēng
措施与恐怖份子作斗争
measure with terrorism give fighting
‘The governments of two countries will take measures to fight against the
terrorism.’
Diao (2004) divides the Chinese light verbs into two groups, ie, the Make Group
and the Give Group. The Make Group includes light verbs such as ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ (进行
proceed), ‘congshı̀’ (从事take), ‘zuò’ (作do), ‘gǎo’ (搞do), ‘gan’ (干do), ‘nòng’ (弄
make), etc. The Give Group includes ‘jiāyǐ’ (加以give), ‘gěiyǔ’ (给予give), ‘yúyǐ’
(予以give), ‘gěiyǐ’ (给以give) (Diao 2004, p. 32). Kuo and Ting (2007) follow this
classification and offer some examples, such as the followings:
The Make Group
(6) a. CSI duı̀ zhègè anzi jı̀nxı́ng diaochá
CSI 对这个案子进行调查
CSI to this case proceed investigation
‘CSI made an investigation of this case.’
b. CSI duı̀ zhègè rén zuò pı́nggu

CSI 对这个人作评估
CSI to this person make evaluation
‘CSI made an evaluation of this person.’
The Give Group

(7) a. CSI duı̀ zhègè anzi jiāyǐ diaochá
CSI 对这个案子加以调查
CSI to this case give investigation
‘CSI gave an investigation of this case.’
b. CSI duı̀ zhègè anzi yúyǐ diaochá

CSI 对这个案子予以调查
‘CSI gave an investigation of this case.’
c. CSI duı̀ zhègè anzi gěiyǔ diaochá

CSI 对这个案子给予调查
‘CSI gave an investigation of this case.’ (Kuo and Ting 2007).
All the Chinese light verbs in the above sentences can be interchangeable, for the
light verbs are weak in meaning. At the same time, the Chinese light verbs have
some basic constraints on their usage, especially with regard to the requirements for
their object or complement.
Syntactically, the objects of Chinese light verbs can consist of verbal nouns. All
the “verbs” in the position of the object of the light verbs, whether they are
“transitive verbs” or “intransitive verbs”, simply function as nouns in Chinese
light verb constructions. In a strict sense, the objects or complements must be
disyllables which express movement or action, such as ‘diaochá’ (调查investigate),
‘yánji
u’ (研究investigate, research), ‘pı̄pı́ng’ (批评criticize), ‘chéngban’ (惩办
punish), ‘dòuzhēng’ (斗争fight) in the above sentences.
Semantically, the Chinese light verb has no lexical content and it can be omitted
without changing the sentence meaning, and the objects of the light verb must be
the “verbs” which express the progression meanings, not the “verbs” expressing the
meaning of temporality.
Pragmatically, light verbs can be used to change the focus or the topic of the
sentences, and they are also used to give emphasis to the theme of the sentence
(Wang and Zhang 2014).
Light verbs have attracted attention in natural language processing and machine
translation in recent years (Brugman 2001; Nagy et al. 2013; Tan et al. 2006; Wang
and Ikeda 2008; Yu et al. 2005), but there has been little or no research focusing on
how they are translated. The present chapter discusses light verbs in translated
Chinese drawing on our suite of corpora.
9.2 Light Verbs in LCMC and ZCTC 137
9.2 Light Verbs in LCMC and ZCTC
In this section, we discuss the concordance results of searches for light verbs in
Chinese comparable corpora, ie, LCMC and ZCTC. The Chinese texts in all the
corpora are annotated by ICTCLAS 2008. Within the framework of ICTCLAS,
light verbs are annotated as ‘vx’, and the Xaira and WordSmith software allow us to
concordance all the light verbs in the Chinese corpus very quickly. The
concordancing results from LCMC by WordSmith 5.0 are illustrated in Figs. 9.1
and 9.2 respectively.
Both Xaira and WordSmith give us the same results. The frequency of light
verbs in LCMC is 1010. The concordancing results from LCMC and ZCTC by
WordSmith 5.0 are as follows:
Figure 9.2 shows the concordancing result of light verbs in LCMC by Xaira:
From the concordancing results, the ‘vx’ list includes the following words:
‘jı̀nxı́ng’ (进行proceed),‘gěiyǔ’ (给予give),‘yǔyǐ’ (予以give),‘jiāyǐ’ (加以
give), etc.
The concordancing result of ‘vx’ in LCMC is 1010, while the number in ZCTC
is 1243, the list presents in Table 9.1:
The log-likelihood score is a rigorous test which does not assume the normal
distribution of data (McEnery et al. 2006, p. 55). The total number of light verbs in
ZCTC is much higher than that in LCMC (LL ¼ 25.53, p < 0.001). There are many
light verbs in Chinese and their distribution and functions cannot be described
exhaustively and clearly in limited space. For this reason, we have narrowed down
Fig. 9.1 ‘vx’ in WordSmith 5.0

Fig. 9.2 ‘vx’ in Xaira
Table 9.1 ‘vx’ in LCMC and LCMC ZCTC LL score Sig.

ZCTC
Total 1010 1243 25.53 0.000
jı̀nxı́ng 791 1017 29.67 0.000
gěiyǔ 92 106 1.07 0.300
yǔyǐ 33 29 0.24 0.628
jiāyǐ 92 87 0.11 0.738
p < 0.001 means the significance
the selection of verbs studied for this research. The concordance results of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’
in LCMC and ZCTC are presented in Table 9.1 and the log likelihood value is 29.67
(p < 0.001), and the frequencies of other light verbs, such as ‘gěiyǔ’ (give), ‘yǔyǐ’
(give), ‘jiāyǐ’ (take) etc. in the two corpora have no significant difference,
so the following section will focus on ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ which is the most frequently used
light verb in the two Chinese corpora.
9.3 The Light Verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in Translated Chinese

and Original Chinese
This section focuses on the light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in translated and original Chinese.
Table 9.1 shows that ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ occurs more frequently in translated Chinese than in
non-translated Chinese. This statistic leads us to question why the light verb
9.3 The Light Verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in Translated Chinese and Original Chinese 139
‘jı̀nxı́ng’ might be over-represented in translated Chinese and whether this apparent

over-use might be a consequence of hybridisation.
As a light verb, ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ has some specific characteristics. According to L€u
(1999), ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ (进行) can be used to express continuing events, and it can be
combined with the aspect marker ‘le’ (了) which means “finished”, but cannot be
combined with the aspect markers ‘zhe’ (着) and ‘guo’ (过). Its objects can be
nouns, noun phrases, verbs, verb phrases, etc. Two basic requirements for its
objects are the following:
1. Its object expresses an action/event, eg ‘jı̀nxı́ng tǎolun’ (进行讨论have a dis-
cussion), ‘jı̀nxı́ng xiángxı̀ de diaochá’ (进行详细的调查make [lit. ‘proceed’] a
detailed investigation), ‘duı̀ liǎngzhǒng fāng’ an jı̀nxı́ng le bǐjiāo’ (对两种方案
进行了比较take a comparison between two projects).
2. Its subject also expresses the action/event, such as ‘huı̀yı̀ zhèngzai jı̀nxı́ng’ (会议
正在进行the meeting is on the way), ‘gōngchéng yǐjı̄ng jı̀nxı́ng le sāngè yuè le’
(工程已经进行了三个月了the project has been carried out for 3 months)
(L€u 1999, pp. 310–311).
Other specific characteristics of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ include the following three aspects.
The first one is that the complement of its object cannot be a monosyllable, so the
expressions such as ‘jı̀nxı́ng chá’ (进行查carry out an investigation) is not accept-
able. It should be pointed out that most of the objects of light verb of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ are
disyllabic, and some tri-syllablic with suffix, ‘hua’ (化: -ization) and four-syllable
verb phrases can also be used as the object of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ (Zhou 1987).
The second is that the verbs used as the object of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ cannot take any
further object of their own. If the light verb requires a patient, it can be introduced
by the preposition, ‘duı̀’, as in ‘duı̀ yusuan jı̀nxı́ng shěnchá’ (对预算进行审查 audit
of budget). And the third constraint is that the light verb can be only used for
describing formal situations, not for informal or temporary situations, so ‘jı̀nxı́ng
tánpan’ (进行谈判, conducting negotiations) is acceptable, while ‘jı̀nxı́ng shuōhua’
(进行说话, conducting a talk) is not (L€u 1999, pp. 310–311).
Zhu (1985) also points out that gerunds used as the objects of the light verb
‘jı̀nxı́ng’ can be modified by nouns, noun phrases or numerals, but cannot be
modified by adverbs. So, ‘jı̀nxı́ng nongcun diaochá’ (进行农村调查: make [lit.
‘proceed’] an investigation in the countryside) is acceptable, for the object of
‘diaochá’ (调查investigation) is modified by a noun ‘nongcun’ (农村 countryside),
while ‘jı̀nxı́ng mǎshang diaochá’ (进行马上调查 make an investigation immedi-
ately) is not acceptable, for the object ‘diaochá’ (调查 investigation) is modified by
an adverb ‘mǎshang’ (马上immediately).
Zhou (1985, 1987) indicates that the object of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ can be modified by
adjectives, nouns, nouns of locality/localizers, verbs, numeral þ classifier construc-
tion, subject-predicate phrases, verb-object phrases and prepositional objects,
such as:
‘jı̀nxı́ng youjı̄zhan’ (进行游击战) (jinxing þ noun object)
‘jı̀nxı́ng fēnlèi’ (进行分类) (jinxing þ verb-object phrase)
‘jı̀nxı́ng yı́cı̀ jiāoyı̀’ (进行一次交易) (jinxing þ numeral þ classifier construction)
(Meng et al. 1999, p. 209).
All the specific characteristics of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ are related to the collocations of the
light verb. We turn now to a more detailed investigation of the occurrences of the
light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in our comparable Chinese corpus, ie, LCMC and ZCTC.
9.3.1 Collocations of ‘jιnxı́ng’ in LCMC
According to Sinclair (1991), collocations can be dramatic and interesting because

they are unexpected, or they can be important in the lexical structure of the
language because they are frequently repeated (Sinclair 1991, p. 170). In translation
studies, Newmark (1988) regards sensitivity to acceptable collocations as a chal-
lenge to the translator. The good translator is conscious of the difference between
source and target languages:
He himself usually knows that he cannot write more than a few complex sentences in a
foreign language without writing something unnatural and non-native, any more than he
can speak one. He will be ‘caught’ every time, not by his grammar, which is probably
suspiciously ‘better’ than an educated native’s, not by his vocabulary, which may well be
wider, but by his unacceptable or improbable collocations (Newmark 1988, p. 180).
The light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in Chinese possesses some specific collocational

charactersitics. This section investigates the collocations of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ using our
suite of corpora. The corpus software, Xaira, can again provide us a means of
measuring the strength of collocation with reference to their Z-score.
Figure 9.3 illustrates the collocations of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in Xaira:
Fig. 9.3 Collocates of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ with z-score in Xaira

Table 9.2 Collocations of Node Frequency Z-score

‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in LCMC
vn 251 53.2
ule 81 29
a 57 6.3
b 18 4.6
Fig. 9.4 ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ with ‘gerund’ in LCMC
The z-score is a measure which adjusts for the general frequencies of the words
involved in a potential collocation and shows how much more frequent the collo-
cation of a word with the node word is than one would expect from their general
frequencies in the corpus. The z-score measure is widely used and is built into
corpus analysis tools such as Xaira (McEnery et al. 2006, p. 215).
The list of collocations of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in LCMC with a z-score above 3 and a
frequency above 5 is illustrated in Table 9.2:
Most of the items in the collocate list of the light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’, such as ‘vn’
(gerund), ‘a’ (adjective), ‘b’ (distinguishing words) etc. are included in the require-
ment of L€ u (1999). The ‘vn’ (gerund) collocates of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ are illustrated in
Fig. 9.4. For example, ‘jı̀nxı́ng tiáozhěng’ (进行调整make an adjustment), ‘jı̀nxı́ng
gǎizhuāng’ (进行改装make a refit), ‘jı̀nxı́ng cāozuò’(进行操作make an operation),
‘jı̀nxı́ng huánjı̀ng gǎizao’(进行环境改造make an environmental reform), etc.
The aspect marker of ‘le’ (了) can also collocate with ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ as shown in
Fig. 9.5. For example, ‘jı̀nxı́ng le gōngjı̄’ (进行了攻击: launched an attack),
‘jı̀nxı́ng le huı̀tán’ (进行了会谈: had a negotiation), etc.
The collocates of adjective (a) and the distinguishing words (b) are showed in
Figs. 9.6 and 9.7 respectively.
Fig. 9.5 ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ þ ‘le’ in LCMC
Fig. 9.6 ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ þ ‘a’ (adjective) in LCMC
Fig. 9.7 ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ þ ‘b’ (distinguishing words) in LCMC

All the adjectives that collocate with ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ specify the verbal nouns within
the light verb constructions, as in ‘jı̀nxı́ng zhèngquè de chǔlǐ’ (进行正确的处理,
make a correct disposal).
The distinguishing words collocating with ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ can also specify the verbal
noun within the light verb constructions, eg ‘jı̀nxı́ng da guı̄mo gǎizao’ (进行大规模
改造, make extensive reconstruct or reform).
All these categories of the collocates (gerund, aspect marker ‘le’, adjectives,
etc.) show that the usage of the light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in original Chinese accords with
the requirements of modern written Chinese discussed by Zhu (1985) and L€u (1999)
and summarized in the previous section.
9.3.2 Collocations of ‘jιnxı́ng’ in ZCTC
The question is whether the patterns of collocation of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ extend to translated

Chinese. Using the same method for concordancing the collocations of the light
verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in LCMC (Z-score >3, frequency > 5), we obtained the following
results from the translated Chinese corpus of ZCTC, presented in Table 9.3:
Tables 9.2 and 9.3 together illustrate the fact that most of the collocates of the
‘node’ words with ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in LCMC and ZCTC are similar, eg ‘vn’ (gerund), ‘ule’
(aspect marker ‘le’), ‘a’ (adjective), and ‘b’ (distinguishing words). The most
frequent collocates are disyllablic gerunds, such as ‘diaochá’ (调查, investigation),
‘fēnxı̄’ (分析,analysis), ‘biǎoyǎn’ (表演,performance), ‘gǎigé’ (改革,reform),
‘zhǔnbèi’ (准备,preparation), pure nouns or noun phrases, such as ‘bǐsai’ (比赛,
match), ‘bianlun’ (辩论,debate), ‘zhanzhēng’ (战争,war), ‘yı̀chéng’ (议程,agenda)
in the following sentences:
(8) 捷克斯洛伐克布拉格斯巴达队还应邀于2月1日在广州同广州白云足球
队进行一场友谊赛 (have a friendly game, have a friendly football match)
(9) 不要就最惠国待遇问题进行旷日持久的辩论,而应按照下述原则重新制
订一项对华政策 (have a protracted debate)
Table 9.3 Collocations of Node Frequency Z-score

‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in ZCTC
vn 394 76.3
ule 81 25.7
uguo 14 12.4
a 91 11.7
ude3 9 6.4
b 21 4.6
ude1 92 4.6
uzhe 6 3.1
(10) 进行一场艰苦卓绝的战争 (have an arduous war)
(11) 下面进行本次大会的第三项议程 (Let us proceed to the third item on the

agenda of the conference)
Tables 9.2 and 9.3 offer a wealth of information about the collocations of
‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in LCMC and ZCTC. Most of the collocation categories are the same
(such as ‘vn’, ‘ule’, ‘a’, ‘b’), and they are in accordance with the requirements
discussed by Zhu (1985), L€u (1999) and Diao (2004). We can say that, this is the
normalization effect in translation and the translated Chinese is in these respects
influenced by the norms of the target language.
But the results in ZCTC also illustrate the fact that ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in translated Chinese
can collocate with such items as aspect markers ‘guo’ (过) and ‘zhe’ (着), structural
particles ‘de’ (得) and ‘de’ (的), with a high z-score and frequency. In other words,
‘jı̀nxı́ng’ can be used in contexts which seem unacceptable or not correct, according
to the grammatical rules identified by Zhu (1985) and L€ u (1999). The results
demonstrate the tendency for there to be a wider range of collocates for the same
node word in translated Chinese than that in non-translated Chinese (Dai 2013,
pp. 130–135).
Among the “strange” collocations of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in translated Chinese are, not
surprisingly, some English character strings (tagged as ‘x’ in the corpus).
(12) 它还有许多不足之处, 例如: 它无法进行DNS查询 (take a DNS survey)
(13) 一些小型、廉价、简化的Internet装置和信息家电对PC构成了很大威
胁,例如Web浏览器盒和能够进行Internet接入的小型电话等 (provide
Internet access)
(14) 为了使环上的设备互相协作, 当每个设备第一次连接到环上的时候, 设

备都必须进行LIP (环初始化进程) (proceeding the LIP)
There appear five occurrences of ‘x’ in ZCTC, while there is none in LCMC. The
light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ can also collocate with the transcription of geographic names
(tagged as ‘nsf’ in the corpus), such as:
(15) “. . .希望继续进行莱茵河西岸正在进行的战役, 因为他相信如此一来,
在突破莱茵河防线之前, 能够摧毁希特勒的大量兵员。” (the battle to
the west of the Rhine)
The collocation of English character strings and transcription of geographic
names can be considered an obvious effect of the “source language shining
through” in the translation process.
From the evidence so far, we can form a tentative hypothesis that two contra-
dictory factors may account for the relatively greater use of the light verb‘jı̀nxı́ng’
in translated Chinese: (i) the normalization process by which translators aim to
conform to the conventions of non-translated language and (ii) the pressure of the
‘source language shining through’, which intensifies the number of light verbs
9.4 The Light Verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in English-Chinese Parallel Corpora 145
found in translated Chinese. To explore in detail how translated Chinese relates to

the source language in relation to light verbs, we now consider the equivalents
of‘jı̀nxı́ng’ using our parallel corpora.
9.4 The Light Verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in English-Chinese Parallel

Corpora
This section discusses the translations of light verbs ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in English. An

analysis of the English equivalents can provide further detail about the translation
strategies used in relation to light verbs in English and Chinese, and the reasons
why translated texts have different collocations from non-translated texts.
9.4.1 Concordancing of ‘jιnxı́ng’ in Parallel Corpora
We concordanced two English-Chinese parallel corpora, ie, GCEPC-FictCom and

Babel. There are 83 occurrences of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in the translated fictional Chinese
corpus, illustrated in Fig. 9.8.
Figure 9.9 shows the concordance results for ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in Babel.
Fig. 9.8 ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in translated fictional Chinese

Fig. 9.9 ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in Babel corpus
Figure 9.9 indicates that there are 238 occurrences of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in translated
Chinese. These results are discussed in the following section.
9.4.2 English Equivalents of ‘jιnxı́ng’
We investigated all the concordance results from the two parallel corpora (83 occur-
rences in Fig. 9.8 and 238 in Fig. 9.9). The translation equivalents can be classified
into the following categories:
9.4.2.1 Lexical Verbs with Meaning of ‘conducting’ and ‘proceeding’
In English, the lexical verbs/verb phrases ‘conduct’, ‘proceed’, ‘wage’, ‘carry on’,
‘carry out’, ‘go on’, ‘turn up’, ‘commit an act’, etc. can be translated into Chinese
light verb constructions with ‘jı̀nxı́ng’.
For examples:
(1) a) <s n¼“540”>As they drifted down the crowded pavements, not quite
abreast and never looking at one another, they carried on a curious,
intermittent conversation which flicked on and off like the beams of a
lighthouse. . .</s>
b) <s n¼“540”>人行道_n 上面_f 挨挨_v 挤挤_v,_w 他们_r 便_d 给_p 人

群_n 拥_v 着_u 走_v,_w 绝不_d 肩_v 并_c 肩_n,_w 绝_d 不_d 看_v 一
_m 眼_q,_w 只是_d 进行_v 一_m 种_q 奇特_a 之_u 极_ng 、_w 时_ng
断_v 时_ng 续_v 的_u 谈话_vn . . . </s>
In this example, ‘carried on a curious, intermittent conversation’ is translated
into Chinese as ‘jı̀nxı́ng yı̄zhǒng qı́tè zhi jı́ shı́duanshı́xu de tánhua’ (进行一种奇特
之极、时断时续的谈话: make a curious and disconnected conversation).
(2) a) <s n¼“1960”>As we have seen, researches that could be called scientific
are still carried out for the purposes of war, but . . . </s>
b) <s n¼“1960”>上面_f 已经_d 说_v 过_u,_w 够_v 得_u 上_v 称为_v 科
学_a 的_u 研究_vn 工作_vn 仍_d 在_p 为_v 战争_n 目的_n 而_c 进行
_v,_w 但. . . </s>
In this sentence, ‘researches. . . are still carried out’ translated into ‘yánjiu
gōngzuò réng zai . . .jı̀nxı́ng’ (研究工作仍在. . .进行: the researches are still carried
out).
(3) a) <s n¼“1466”>Somehow it worked in an easy kind of way. </s>
b) <s n¼“1466”>不知_v 怎_r 地_u 进行_v 得_u 很_d 顺利_a 。_w </s>
In this example, the English phrase ‘worked in an easy kind of way’ is translated
into ‘jı̀nxı́ng de hěn shunlı̀’ (进行得很顺利: go with a swing).
(4) a) <s n¼“L1E_1552”>They sit down to commit an act of literature, and the
self who emerges on paper is a far stiffer person than the one who sat down
.. </s>
b) <s n¼“L2C_1552”>他们_r 坐_v 下来_v 进行_v 一_m 次_q 文学_n 创
作_vn,_w 可_v 是_v 出现_v 在_p 纸_n 上_f 的_u 自我_r 比_p 坐_v 下
来_v 的_u 本人_r 要_v 呆板_a 得_u 多_a 。_w </s>
‘commit an act of literature’ translated into ‘jı̀nxı́ng yı́cı̀ wén xué chuangzuò’(进
行一次文学创作: have a literary production).
(5) a) <s n¼“L1E_0044”>we faced problems with the enemy that had contin-
ued to say for decades ’we will never negotiate with terrorists ’ .. </s>
b) <s n¼“L2C_0044”>我们_r 曾_d 面对_v 对待_v 敌人_n 的_u 问题_n,
_w 这些_r 敌人_n 几十_m 年_q 来_f 一直_d 在_p 说_v,_w “_w 我们_r
永远_d 不_d 和_c 恐怖_a 分子_n 进行_v 谈判_vn “_w 。_w </s>
‘negotiate with terrorists’ can also be translated into a Chinese light verb
construction.
(6) a) <s n¼“L1E_0360”>Sordo and his men put up a brave fight but are killed
when the Fascist bombers arrive .. </s>
b) <s n¼“L2C_0360”>“_w 聋子_n “_w 及其_c 部下_n 勇敢_a 地_u 进行
_v 抵抗_vn,_w 但_c 法西斯_nz 军队_n 的_u 轰炸机_n 一_m 到_v,_w
他们_r 就_d 全_a 被_p 炸_v 死_v 了_y 。_w </s>
‘put up a brave fight’ is translated into a light verb construction with ‘jı̀nxı́ng’.
9.4.2.2 Abstract Nouns/Noun Phrases with Meanings of ‘in progress’,

‘underway’ or nouns-‘progress/process’
The English nouns or noun phrases with the meanings of ‘process’, ‘progress’ or
related meanings can be translated into Chinese light verb construction with
‘jı̀nxı́ng’. Examples include:
(7) a) <s n¼“678”>This process of continuous alteration was applied not only to
newspapers, . . ..
b) _w修改_v 的_u 工作_vn 就_d 这样_r 不断_d 进行_v;_w<s
n¼“678”>而_c 修改_v 所_u 及_c . . .</s>
The English abstract noun phrase ‘process of continuous alteration’ can be
translated into the Chinese as ‘jı̀nxı́ng xiudı̀ng’.
(8) a) <s n¼“52”>Now, a judicious selection from these with the least possible
delay, and the burying of them, or otherwise getting of them out of harm’s
way, is within the power (without loss of precious time) of scarcely any
one but myself, if any one.
b) <s n¼“52”>现在_t 必须_d 不失时机_l 地_u 对_p 这些_r 帐_q 册_q 文
件_n 进行_v 准确_ad 选择_v,_w 把_p 它们_r 埋_v 到_v 地下_s 或_c 藏
_v 到_v 安全_an 的_u 地方_n 去_v 。_w 而_c 能_v 办_v 好_a 这_r 事
_n 一_m —_w 如果_c 还_d 有人_r 能_v 办到_v 的_u 话_n ——_w 却_d
又_d 不_d 致_v 浪费_v 宝贵_a 的_u 时间_n 的_u 就_d 只有_c 我_r,_w
别的_r 人_n 都_d 不行_a 。_w </s>
The phrase ‘a judicious selection’ can be translated into Chinese light verb
construction with ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ as ‘jı̀nxı́ng zhǔnquè xuǎnzé’ (进行准确选择: make a
correct choice).
9.4.2.3 Gerunds and Progress Tense with Meaning of ‘carrying out’
The gerund, gerundive and progressive aspect all end in ‘–ing’, and there are many
kinds of combinations of progressive aspects in English with tense and other
aspects, such as present progressive, past progressive, present perfect progressive,
past perfect progressive, etc. The gerund, gerundive and progressive forms often
express a sense of the progress of an action or event, and when they do, these
meanings can be expressed by ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in Chinese. For example:
(9) a) <s n¼“1743”>There is an ongoing debate within Congress and the federal
agencies about the efficacy of using trade policy to further foreign policy
objectives. </s>
b) <s n¼“1743”>至于_p 利用_v 外贸_n 政策_n 来_f 达到_v 外交_n 上_f
的_u 目的_n 是否_v 有效_a,_w 国会_n 及_c 联邦_n 政府_n 机构_n 内
部_f 正_d 就_p 这_r 一_m 问题_n 进行_v 着_u 一_m 场_q 辩论_vn 。
_w </s>
The gerundive þ noun construction of ‘an ongoing debate’ can be translated into
a light verb construction with ‘jı̀nxı́ng’.
(10) a) <s n¼“2239”>It need hardly be said that the subtlest practitioners of
doublethink are those who invented doublethink and know that it is a vast
system of mental cheating. </s>
b) <s n¼“2239”>不用_d 说_v,_w 双重_b 思想_n 最_d 巧妙_a 的_u 运用
_vn 者_k 就是_d 发明_v 双重_b 思想_n 、_w 知道_v 这_r 是_v 进行
_v 思想_n 欺骗_v 的_u 好_a 办法_n 的_u 那些_r 人_n 。_w </s>
The gerund, ‘cheating’, is translated into ‘jı̀nxı́ng qı̄pian’(进行欺骗: make a
cheat).
(11) a) <s n¼“179”>Goldstein was delivering his usual venomous attack upon
the doctrines of the Party -- an attack so exaggerated and perverse that a
child should have been able to see through it, and yet just plausible
enough to fill one with an alarmed feeling that other people, less level-
headed than oneself, might be taken in by it. </s>
b) <s n¼“179”>像_p 惯_v 常_d 一样_a,_w 戈_nr 德_nr 斯坦_nr 对_p 党
_n 的_u 原则_n 进行_v 恶毒_a 的_u 攻击_vn,_w 这_r 攻击_v 实在_d
是_v 夸大其辞_i,_w 强词夺理_i,_w 连_u 个_q 毛孩子_n 也_d 能_v 看
_v 穿_v;_w 然而_c 却_d 一派_b 花言巧语_i,_w 叫_v 人_n 不_d 能_v
不_d 提高_v 警惕_an,_w 旁人_r 若是_c 不_d 及_c 你_r 的_u 觉悟_n
高_a,_w 一_m 准_h 给_p 拉拢_v 下水_v 。_w </s>
The past progressive ‘was delivering’ is translated into Chinese light verb
construction.
(12) a) <s n¼“65”>In the meantime, it is always preparing, though it is not seen
or heard. </s>
b) <s n¼“65”>同时_c,_w 地震_n 的_u 准备_vn 虽然_c 看_v 不见_v 听
_v 不见_v,_w 却_d 总_d 在_p 进行_v 着_u 。_w </s>
The present progressive ‘is always preparing’ is also translated into light verb
construction with ‘jı̀nxı́ng’.
(13) a) <s n¼“222”>Yet, work of that kind was being done in the garret; </s>
b) <s n¼“222”>可是_c 现在_t 这种_r 工作_vn 却_d 在_p 这里_r 进行_v
着_u 。_w
Here the past progressive passive of ‘was being done’ is translated by the light
verb construction with ‘jı̀nxı́ng’.
9.4.2.4 ‘Make’ verbs in English
In English, the verb of ‘make’ can be used as a light verb. Some translators
translated the ‘make’ verb constructions in English into Chinese as light verb
constructions, for example:
(14) a) <s n¼“275”>“For his sake, Doctor,” she said, pointing to him in tears, “I
would do all I can to make what poor amends I can. </s>
b) <s n¼“275”>“为了孩子的缘故, 医生, “她流着眼泪指着孩子说,
“我愿竭尽我可怜的一点力量进行弥补。 </s>
(15) a) <s n¼“868”>one makes the revolution in order to establish the

dictatorship.
b) <s n¼“868”>反过来_d 进行_v 革命_vn 是_v 为了_p 建立_v 专政_n 。
(16) a) <s n¼“1920”>During this time rockets loaded with atomic bombs can be
assembled at all the strategic spots; finally they will all be fired simulta-
neously, with effects so devastating as to make retaliation impossible. </
s>
b) <s n¼“1920”>在_p 这_r 期间_f 把_p 装_v 好_a 的_u 原子弹_n 的_u
火箭_n 部署_v 在_p 一切_r 战略_n 要_v 地_u,_w 最后_f 万_m 箭_n
齐_d 发_v,_w 使_v 对方_n 遭到_v 致命_vn 破坏_vn,_w 根本_d 不_d
可能_v 进行_v 报复_vn 。_w
The four categories of equivalents of light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in English explored at
above consist of prevalent usage of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in translated Chinese, and they also
shed light on the methods for translating the light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ from Chinese into
English.
9.4.3 Methods for Translating ‘jιnxı́ng’ into English
According to Miao (1999), ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in Chinese sentences cannot be directly

translated into English, in such sentences as ‘wǒguo zhèngzai duı̀ guoyı́ng qǐyè
jı̀nxı́ng gǎigé’ (我国正在对国营企业进行改革: Our country is making a reform
on the state-owned enterprises) (Miao 1999). In fact, the light verb of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ can
be translated into English as in the following five sentences (Yu et al. 2005, p. 516):
1. We are carrying on reforms on the state-owned enterprises in our country.
2. We are making reforms on the state-owned enterprises in our country.
3. The reforms on the state-owned enterprises are being carried out in our country.
4. We are reforming the state-owned enterprises in our country.
5. The state-owned enterprises are being reformed in our country.
All these translations offer some methods for translating the Chinese light verb
of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ into English.
With the help of examples discussed above (ie the 83 þ 238 concordance lines)
and more examples from other larger parallel corpora, we can observe that the light
verb, ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ can be translated into English as ‘carry on’, ‘carry out’, ‘undertake’,
‘undergo’, ‘conduct’, ‘engage’, ‘engage in’, ‘make’, ‘hold’, ‘commit’, ‘have’, ‘do’,
‘hold’, ‘pay’, ‘wage’, ‘launch’, etc. (Wang and Zhang 2014).
9.5 The Light Verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in Diachronic Comparable Corpora 151
9.5 The Light Verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in Diachronic Comparable

Corpora
If translated Chinese is characterized by a higher frequency of use of light verbs

than normative non-translated Chinese, it is reasonable to investigate whether, over
time, the frequency of this feature has also increased in non-translated Chinese. To
explore this issue, we concordanced one diachronic comparable Chinese corpus that
we designed for our research. Table 9.4 illustrates the frequencies of the light verb
‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in MCCC-ACADEMIC:
The light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ is clearly used more frequently in the TC corpus than
that in Non-TC. This finding is in accordance with the tendency which has been
described in the above sections.
The change over time is also suggestive. In the non-translated Chinese texts,
‘jı̀nxı́ng’ occurred 1.3 times per 10,000 words in the 1930s–1960s, and 5.6 times in
the 1970s–2000s. Meanwhile, in the translated Chinese versions, the frequencies of
‘jı̀nxı́ng’ are 5.3 per 10,000 words in the 1930s–1960s, and 14.7 in the 1970s–
2000s. More examples of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ are used over time in academic TC and Non-TC,
but the rate of the rise in the TC is much higher than that in the Non-TC corpus.
Both the translated Chinese and non-translated Chinese texts used more and
more light verbs over time. We can cautiously explore possible implications of the
light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ being used increasingly frequently in TC and non-TC contexts:
1. As we pointed out in the preceding section, light verbs can be omitted without
changing the sentence’s meaning, eg in the light verb construction ‘jı̀nxı́ng
jiāotán’ (进行交谈: make a talk) the light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ can be omitted, but
the meaning of ‘jiāotán’ (交谈: talk) does not change. However, the light verb,
‘jı̀nxı́ng’ marks the construction as normal, and changes it into an abstract action
or event (see also Yu 2002, pp. 153–156).
2. As we saw above, according to Liu (2010), Chinese is a “verby” language, while
English as a “nouny” language (Liu 2010). English-Chinese translations have
introduced more and more English nouns/noun phrases into Chinese. It may be
that the frequent availability of this grammatical resource in translated Chinese
has gradually influenced its use in non-translated Chinese.
3. Xiang (1993, p. 524) regards the light verb construction as a new type of ‘ba’
(把) construction in Chinese. Light verbs such as ‘zuò’ (作), ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ (进行),
‘jiāyǐ’ (加以) are used as the main verbs in the sentence with a nominalized verb
as the object of the light verbs (Xiang 1993, pp. 514–528).
Table 9.4 ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in MCCC-ACADEMIC

TC Non-TC
1930s–1960s 1970s–2000s 1930s–1960s 1970s–2000s
corpus size 920,681 6,734,236 1,820,456 3,485,160
freq.of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ 484 9888 240 1935
freq.per 10,000 5.3 14.7 1.3 5.6
4. Cai (1986) investigates ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ (进行) in different styles of non-translated

Chinese and finds out that it is one of the most frequently used words, especially
in formal styles, such as scientific writing, academic writing and political
writings.
Evidence from our parallel corpora support the observation that light verbs are
being used more frequently in both TC and non-TC. There may be various reasons
for this. The case study of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ suggests that it can be used in translation to
indicate a range of formal and semantic features, ie it can translate light verbs,
resultative verbs and lexical verbs that express the idea of an event being in
progress. Its frequency of use in TC may be influencing its increased use in
non-TC texts, but to confirm this hypothesis we would need further evidence of
the use of a wider range of light verbs in different text types.
9.6 Conclusions
The present chapter has offered a detailed case study of the distribution and
functions of the light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ and its constructions in translated Chinese
and non-translated Chinese. The findings indicate that translated Chinese uses more
light verbs than that non-translated Chinese. We classified the parallel corpora
results of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ and its English equivalents and concluded that four major
equivalents of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in English are at least partly responsible for the wide use
of the light verb in translated Chinese.
Most of the collocation categories of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in translated and non-translated
Chinese are the same, namely, the gerund, adjective, distinguishing words, etc.
which are in accordance with the conventions of modern written Chinese as
described by Zhu (1985), L€u (1999) and Diao (2004), etc. We can explain this
similarity by appealing to the normalization effect in translation from English into
Chinese whereby the translated language is influenced by the norms of the target
language.
However, the usages and collocations of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ also display different features
in translated Chinese: it can collocate with the aspect markers ‘zhe’ (着 which
means the progression of an action or event) and ‘guo’ (过 which means the
completeness of an action or event) with high frequencies and z-scores that indicate
that these frequencies are statistically significant. These usages and collocations
violate the grammatical rules pointed out by L€ u (1999) and Zhu (1985), etc.
The collocations such as English character strings and transcription of geo-
graphic names can be the effect of the “source language shining through” in the
translation process.
The increasing frequencies of ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ both in translated and original Chinese
within diachronic comparable corpus suggest the tendency towards abstraction and
nominalization of the light verb constructions. The chapter also offered some trans-
lating options for the Chinese light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ into English, drawing on
parallel corpus data.
References 153
References
Brugman, C. 2001. Light verbs and polysemy. Language Sciences 23: 551–578.
Butt, M., and W. Geuder. 2001. On the (semi)lexical status of light verbs. In Semi-lexical Catego-
ries: The function of content words and the content of function words, ed. N. Corver and
H.v. Riemsdijk, 323–370. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Cai, W. 1986. Dai Feimingcixing Binyu de Dongci (Verbs with non-nouny objects). Zhongguo
Yuwen (Studies of the Chinese Language) (4): 253–260. [蔡文兰. (1986). 带非名词性宾语的
动词. hh中国语文ii, (4), 253–260.]
Dai, G. 2013. Fanyi zhong Yuanyu Touguo Xiaoying Yanjiu (“SL shining through” in translated
Diao, Y. 2004. Xiandai Hanyu Xuyi Dongci Yanjiu (Studies on modern Chinese light verbs).
Dalian: Liaoning Shifan Daxue Chubanshe. [刁晏斌. (2004). hh现代汉语虚义动词研究ii. 大
连: 辽宁师范大学出版社.]
Huang, C., and J. Lin. 2013. The ordering of Mandarin Chinese light verbs. In Chinese lexical
semantics(CLSW 2012, LNAI 7717), ed. D. Ji and G. Xiao, 728–735. Heidelberg: Springer.
Kuo, P., and J. Ting. 2007. Light verb, heavy verb, and verbal noun in Mandarin Chinese.
Proceedings of the 9th Seoul International Conference on Generative Grammar (SICOGG
9), 349–357.
语教学ii, 24(1), 3–17.]
u, S. 1999. Xiandai Hanyu Babaici (Modern Chinese: 800 words. Revised edition). Beijing:
L€
Meng, Z. et al., ed. 1999. Hanyu Dongci Yongfa Cidian (Dictionary of Chinese verb usages).
Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [孟琮,郑怀德,孟庆海,蔡文兰. (1999). hh汉语动词用法词典ii.
Miao, C. 1999. Jinxingju de Yuyi Jiegou (Semantic structure of ‘Jinxing’ constructions). In
Jisuanyuyanxue Wenji (Selected papers on computational linguistics), ed. C. Huang, and
Z. Dong, 51–57. Beijing: Qinghua Daxue Chubanshe. [苗传江. (1999). “进行”句的语义结
构. 黄昌宁,董振东, hh计算语言学文集ii (pp. 51–57). 北京: 清华大学出版社.]
Nagy T.I., V. Vincze, and R. Farkas. 2013. Full-coverage identification of English light verb
constructions. Paper presented at the International Joint Conference on Natural Language
Processing, Nagoya, Japan, 14–18 October 2013.
Sinclair, J. 1991. Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tan, Y.F., M. Kan, and H. Cui. 2006. Extending corpus-based identification of light verb
constructions using a supervised learning framework. Paper presented at the Proceedings of
the EACL 2006 workshop on Multi-word-expressions in a multilingual context (MWEmc),
Trento, Italy.
Wang, Y., and T. Ikeda. 2008. Translation of the light verb constructions in Japanese-Chinese
machine translation. Advances in Natural Language Processing and Applications Research in
Computing Science 33: 139–150.
Wang, H., and K. Zhang. 2014. Jiyu Yuliaoku de Qingdongci Jiegou Hanying Fanyi Yanjiu
(Corpus-based Chinese-English translation of light verb construction: ‘jinxing’ as case study).
Jiefangjun Waiguoyu Xueyuan Xuebao (Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages)
37(2): 62–68. [王慧兰,张克亮. (2014). 基于语料库的轻动词结构汉英翻译研究——以”进

行” 类结构为例. hh解放军外国语学院学报ii, 37(2), 62–68.]
Xiang, X. 1993. Jianming Hanyushi Xia (A history of Chinese language, Vol. II). Beijing:
Gaodeng Jiaoyu Chubanshe. [向熹. (1993). hh简明汉语史(下)ii. 北京: 高等教育出版社.]
Yu, S., X. Zhu, and H. Duan. 2005. Xiandai Hanyu zhong de Xingshidongci (Dummy verbs in
contemporary Chinese). Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing 10(4):
509–518.[俞士汶,朱学锋,段惠明. (2005). 现代汉语中的形式动词. Computational Linguistics
and Chinese Language Processing, 10(4), 509–518.]
Zhou, G. 1985. Jiayi Buyi (Additional remarks on ‘Jiayi’ structure). Hanyu Xuexi
(Chinese Language Learning) (3): 16–20. [周刚. (1985). “加以”补议. hh汉语学习ii, (3), 16–20.]
Zhou, G. 1987. Xingshi Dongci de Cifenlei (Subcategorization of light verbs). Hanyu Xuexi
(Chinese Language Learning) (1), 11–14. [周刚. (1987). 形式动词的次分类. hh汉语学习ii,
(1), 11–14.]
Zhu, D. 1985. Xiandai Shumianhanyu li de Xuhua Dongci he Mingdongci: Wei Diyijie Guoji
Hanyu Jiaoxue Taolunhui er Zuo (Light verbs and nominalized verbs in modern Chinese).
Beijingdaxue Xuebao (Journal of Beijing University) (5): 1–6. [朱德熙. (1985). 现代书面汉语
里的虚化动词和名动词:为第一届国际汉语教学讨论会而作. hh北京大学学报ii,(5), 1–6.]
Chapter 10
Syntactic Hybridity in TC: ‘SHI’ Structures
Abstract This chapter explores the syntactic hybridity features in translated Chi-
nese with the focus on ‘SHI’ structure. It first introduces the categories and
functions of ‘SHI’ structure in Chinese, then explores its different collocation
structures in translated and native Chinese. The concordancing results from
English-Chinese parallel corpora illustrates that the high frequency of ‘SHI’ struc-
tures in translated Chinese is the influence of the source language in the translation
processes and nominalization tendency in the translated Chinese.
10.1 Introduction
We have found that the collocations of the classifier construction ‘Yi GE’ (with a
span of left 1: right 0) in LCMC differ sharply from those of ZCTC (see Chap. 8,
Sect. 8.5), but they are similar in that in both corpora ‘YI GE’ collocates with ‘vshi’
(the verb, ‘shi’是) with a high frequency in each case (LCMC294: ZCTC435). This
result indicates that the sentence structure ‘S + vshi + Yi GE + (specifiers/
determinatives) + NP’ is commonly used in both LCMC and ZCTC. However, the
two corpora are likely to differ in other ways with respect to the function and
distribution of ‘vshi’. This chapter investigates the hybridity features of ‘SHI’ and
‘SHI. . .DE’ structures in translated Chinese, compared to non-translated Chinese.
10.2 ‘SHI’ and Its Structure: Categories and Functions
‘SHI’ (是) is the word used most frequently in modern Chinese after ‘DE’ (的) (Li,
1987; Xiao, 2012, p. 129; Xiao & Hu, 2015, p. 138). ‘SHI’ can be used as copula
(Wang, 1990, p. 382), linking verb/judgment verb (L€u, 1999; Shi & Li, 2001),
conjunction (Shi, 2005a), focus marker (Shi & Xu, 2001; Xu, 2001), an emphasis
marker and contrast marker (Shi, 2005a, 2005b).
Any sentence with ‘SHI’ as the main part of the predicate or the predicate itself is
considered a ‘SHI’ sentence in Chinese. In ‘SHI’ sentence structures, the ‘SHI’ is

DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-0742-2_10
156 10 Syntactic Hybridity in TC: ‘SHI’ Structures
multifunctional, as mentioned above: it can be used as a linking verb, a copula, a

focus marker, etc. (cf. Zhang, 2010, pp. 595–596). Among these functions, the
copula is the most common for ‘SHI’ in modern Chinese. Wang (1990) points out
that ‘SHI’ as a copula has developed from the demonstrative pronoun from classical
Chinese. It can be used for the judgment structure and it connects the subject and
object in Chinese (Wang, 1990, p. 265).
The basic structure of the ‘SHI’ sentence is: “NP1 + SHI + NP2”. The slot of
‘NP2’ is usually filled by a nominal element, such as a noun, or noun phrase, while a
verb or adjective can fill in when ‘SHI’ functions as an emphasis marker (Zhu,
1999, pp. 119–120), for example (source: Li, 1987):
1) 毛主席是湖南人
Máo zhǔxı́ shı̀ Húnán rén
Mao Chairman SHI Hunanian
‘Chairman Mao is from Hunan (province).’
‘SHI’ as a copula can be divided into the following categories according to its
different logical and semantic functions:
A. Identical
2) 他最敬佩的是老山前线的战士。
Tā zuı̀ jı̀ngpèi de shı̀ lǎoshān qiánxian de zhanshı̀
He mostly respect DE SHI Laoshan frontier DE soldiers
‘The persons who he respects mostly are the soldiers from Lao shan frontier.’
B. Attribute
3) 他是一位人民教师。
Tā shı̀ yı́wèi rénmı́n jiaoshı̄
He SHI one people teacher
‘He is a teacher.’
C. Existing
4) 村前是一条大河。
Cun qián Shı̀ yı̀tiáo dahé
village before SHI one big river
‘There is a big river in front of the village.’
D. Relationship
5) 李老师和金老师是同乡。
Lı̌lǎoshı̄ hé Jı̄n1lǎoshı̄ Shı̀ tongxiāng
Teacher Li and Teacher Jin SHI townee
‘Mr. Li and Mr. Jin are townees/are from the same place.’
10.2 ‘SHI’ and Its Structure: Categories and Functions 157
E. Comparison
6) 那里是地狱, 这里是天堂。
Nali Shı̀ dı̀yu, zhèli Shı̀ tiāntáng
there SHI hell, here SHI heaven
‘Here is a heaven while there is a hell.’
F. Time and place
7a) 我们上班时间是早晨九点半。
Wǒmén shangbān shı́jiān Shı̀ zǎochén jiǔdiǎnban
we go to work time SHI moring 9:30
‘The time we go to work is 9:30.’
7b) 鬼子下一个攻击目标是阳村。

Guı̌zi xiayı́gè gōngjı̄ mubiāo Shı̀ yángcun
foreign invader next attack goal SHI villageYang
The foreign invaders’ next attack goal is the Village Yang.
G. Material
8) 这把刀是钢打的。
Zhè bǎ dāo Shı̀ gāng dǎ de
This CLASSIFIER knife SHI steel strike DE
‘This knife is made of steel.’
H. Evaluation
9) 新中国的诞生是马列主义毛泽东
Xı̄n zhōngguo DE danshēng Shı̀ mǎlièzhǔyı̀ máozédōng
New China DE birth SHI Marxism-Leninism MaoZedong
思想的伟大胜利。
sı̄xiǎng DE wěida shènglı̀
thought DE great victory
‘The birth of new China is the greatest victory of Marxism-Leninism and
MaoZedong’s thought.’
I. Affirmation
10) 我们的老师是有办法。
Wǒmen DE lǎoshi Shı̀ yǒu banfǎ
Our DE teacher SHI have method
‘Our teacher is resourceful.’
All these functions of ‘SHI’ can be considered as the norms of ‘SHI’ structures in
native Chinese. The normative usage of ‘SHI’ structures can be distorted in
translated Chinese. The next section will present the ‘SHI’ structures in
non-translated and translated Chinese.
10.3 ‘SHI’ in Non-Translated and Translated Chinese
The concordancing results of ‘SHI’ in non-translated Chinese corpus (LCMC) and

translated Chinese corpus (ZCTC) are presented in Table 10.1:
Table 10.1 shows the raw frequencies and LL values of ‘SHI’ structures in
different genres of LCMC and ZCTC; it is difficult to make sense of the difference
between LCMC and ZCTC from these raw frequencies. Figure 10.1 shows the
normalized frequencies (per. 100,000 words) in the comparable corpus, and it
shows the differences between LCMC and ZCTC in each genre.
Figure 10.1 cannot show the distribution of the ‘SHI’ structures in the compa-
rable corpus. Table 10.2 shows the ‘SHI’ structures in two main categories, i.e.,
non-literature and literature in LCMC and ZCTC. The non-literature includes the
news (press reportage, press editorials and press reviews), general prose (religious
writing, instructional writing, popular lore, biographies and essays, and reports &
official documents) and academic prose, while the literature includes general
fiction, mystery & detective fiction, science fiction, adventure fiction, romantic
fiction and humor.
The LL tests tell us that the frequencies of ‘SHI’ structures in the two categories
of ZCTC are much higher than those in LCMC, and the LL testing shows the
Table 10.1 ‘SHI’ in LCMC ZCTC LCMC

and ZCTC
A 1094 850
B 790 703
C 441 472
D 675 580
E 1063 806
F 1100 1133
G 2406 2062
H 522 280
J 2206 2617
K 951 824
L 741 707
M 157 151
N 823 835
P 724 803
R 261 193
Total 13,954 13,016
10.3 ‘SHI’ in Non-Translated and Translated Chinese 159
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
ZCTC
800
LCMC
600
400
200
0
J
L
F
E
K
C
P
B
R
A
G
H
N
M
Mean
Fig. 10.1 Normalized frequencies of ‘SHI’ in LCMC and ZCTC
Table 10.2 ‘SHI’ in non-lit. ZCTC LCMC LL Sig.

& lit of LCMC and ZCTC
Non-Lit. 10,297 9503 38.39 0.000
Lit. 3657 3513 3.85 0.050
Total 13,954 13,016 39.94 0.000
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
ZCTC
4000
LCMC
2000
0
Fig. 10.2 ‘SHI’ in LCMC and ZCTC
significance for the non-literature category. Meanwhile, the frequency of the ‘SHI’
structure in academic prose from ZCTC is lower than that of LCMC with a higher
LL value (LL value is 32.01, p < 0.0001) (cf. Fig. 10.2).
The statistical data illustrate the difference between LCMC and ZCTC with
regard to the ‘SHI’ structure. The translated Chinese uses ‘SHI’ structures more
commonly than the non-translated Chinese. The analyses of concordancing exam-
ples from translated Chinese texts can tell us the reasons that cause the high
frequencies of ‘SHI’ structures in translated Chinese. The following examples
(1a-2a) from the translated Chinese corpus ZCTC could be changed into sentences
without ‘SHI’ (1b–2b):
(1a) 然而, 对于中国对外政策的这种看法虽然在美国学者中间已取得正统
地位,但它远不是确凿无疑的(Literal meaning: Though the opinion on the
foreign policy of China has received its orthodox position from American
scholars, it is far from accurate)
(1b) 然而, 对于中国对外政策的这种看法虽然在美国学者中间已取得正统
地位,但它远非确凿无疑的。
(2a) 而这一令人痛心的死亡和苦难,在有较好的卫生保健和卫生知识的条件
下是完全可以避免的(Literal meaning: This kind of tragic death and suf-
fering could certainly be avoided with good health care and knowledge.)
(2b) 而这一令人痛心的死亡和苦难,在有较好的卫生保健和卫生知识的条件
下完全可以避免。
The reason for the higher frequency of the ‘SHI’ structure in translated Chinese
than that in native Chinese is obvious here: the translated Chinese uses the ‘SHI’
structure in positions where it is unnecessary in native Chinese. It seems likely that
these ‘redundant’ uses are driven by the pressure to translate from English. The
following sections will test the hypothesis that the high frequency of the ‘SHI’
structure in translated Chinese is a feature of hybridity.
10.4 ‘SHI’ Collocation Structures
The collocations of ‘SHI’ structures in translated and non-translated Chinese texts

are illustrated in Figs. 10.3 and 10.4 with the same parameters: left 0: right
5, z-score > 3:
Table 10.3 can illustrate the difference between LCMC and ZCTC more clearly
with the node list, frequencies and z-scores:
Most of the collocations of ‘SHI’ in translated Chinese texts follow the norms of
native Chinese, such as ‘ude1’ (auxiliary word of ‘de’的), ‘ry’(interrogative pro-
noun), ‘mq’ (numeral-classifier), ‘ryv’ (verbal interrogative pronoun), ‘a’ (adjec-
tives), ‘q’ (classifier), ‘b’ (noun modifier) and ‘bl’ (noun modifying formulaic
expression).
One specific collocation of ‘SHI’ in non-translated Chinese is ‘y’ (modal parti-
cle) with a high frequency (445) and high z-score (3.1), and this collocation does
not occur in the translated Chinese. We have already discussed the uniqueness of
the modal particle in Sect. 7.2, Chap. 7, so the high frequency of modal particles in
non-translated Chinese is understandable.
10.4 ‘SHI’ Collocation Structures 161
Fig. 10.3 Collocations of ‘SHI’ structures in ZCTC
Fig. 10.4 Collocations of ‘SHI’ structures in LCMC
The translated Chinese presents different tendencies for the collocations of ‘SHI’
on the following aspects, such as ‘vl’ (verbal formulaic expression), ‘p’ (preposi-
tion), ‘nl’ (nominal formulaic expression), and ‘ns’ (place name) with high
Table 10.3 Collocations of LCMC ZCTC

‘SHI’ structures in LCMC &
Node Freq. Z-score Node Freq. Z-score
ZCTC
vshi 13,016 440 vshi 13,954 442.2
ude1 4423 24.6 ude1 5183 19.6
ry 352 20.5 ry 342 19.5
mq 494 12.9 a 2736 17.3
ryv 156 9.1 mq 695 16.8
a 2501 8.5 q 1462 13.8
q 1176 5.5 ryv 205 11.6
b 651 5.5 b 626 3.2
bl 46 5.3 bl 56 4.7
y 445 3.1 vl 324 7
– – – p 2791 6.3
– – – nl 117 4.4
– – – ns 342 3.4
Fig. 10.5 SHI + YI GE constructions in ZCTC
frequencies and z-scores. The concordancing results of these features from the
translated Chinese corpus show the complexity of these collocations which are
different from the non-translated Chinese.
Since ‘SHI’ is used multifunctionally in different contexts, we focus here on the
widely-used copula function in the structure ‘NP1 + SHI + NP2’. Zhu (1999) shows
that the slot ‘NP2’ can be a noun or a noun phrase. Chapter 8 Sect. 8.5 mentions that
the ‘SHI + YI GE’ (one + classifier) construction occurs with high frequencies in
LCMC and ZCTC (294: 435). Figure 10.5 presents the ‘SHI + YI GE’ structure in
the translated Chinese corpus of ZCTC:
10.4 ‘SHI’ Collocation Structures 163
Table 10.4 ‘SHI + Yi GE’ ZCTC LCMC

collocations (left0: right5)
node frequency z-score node frequency z-score
a 183 15.7 ude1 162 11.3
ude1 285 14.9 a 120 10.6
vl 22 5.8 – – –
The sentence structure ‘NP1 + vshi + YI GE + (specifiers/ determinatives)

+ NP2’ is one subcategory of ‘NP1 + SHI + NP2’. According to He (2008b), the
‘SHI + YI GE’ construction can function as a generic judgment by which the
predicate expresses generic characteristics of the subject. Before the May Fourth
Movement in 1919, generic judgment sentence structures expressed by ‘numeral
+ classifier’ were relatively uncommon. With more and more ‘numeral + classifier’
constructions used in ‘NP1 + SHI + NP2’ sentences, the ‘numeral + classifier’ began
to function as a noun marker in the sentence.
The concordancing results tell us the difference in collocations of ‘SHI + YI GE’
structure between LCMC and ZCTC; see Table 10.4 (frequency > 5, z-score > 5)
Table 10.4 shows that most of the collocations of the ‘SHI + Yi GE’ structure in
translated Chinese are similar to the non-translated Chinese (the collocations with
adjectives and auxiliary ‘de’). The translated Chinese uses more collocations such
as ‘vl’ (verbal formulaic expression) with a higher z-score, while the non-translated
Chinese uses none of these collocations. This significant difference between trans-
lated and non-translated Chinese indicates a possible hybridity feature that is
discussed in the following section with reference to a parallel corpus.
The same two collocations of ‘SHI + YI GE’ in LCMC and ZCTC are ‘a’
(adjective) and ‘ude1’(auxiliary ‘de’的) within the collocation span of ‘left
0, right 5’. In order to explore the collocations of ‘SHI + YI GE’ clearly, we
concordanced the two corpora with the following conditions as: ‘adjective’ and
‘de’ within the collocation span of ‘right 5’. The findings as regards sentence
structure are illustrated in Figs. 10.6 and 10.7:
Figure 10.6 shows that there are 258 occurrences of ‘SHI + a. + De’ structures in
LCMC, while Fig. 10.7 tells us that there are 346 occurrences in ZCTC.
Figures 10.6 and 10.7 show that the sentence structure of ‘SHI + a. + DE’ is used
more in translated than in non-translated Chinese.
The ‘SHI. . .DE’ structure has attracted considerable attention in Chinese lin-
guistic circles (cf. L€u, 1982; Zhao, 1979; Qi & Zhang, 2005; etc.), and most of the
research has divided the structure into three classes, namely judgment, emphasis,
and confirmation. We analysed all the examples from LCMC and ZCTC, and found
that they can be divided into two main categories, one expressing a finished action
or event, and the other expressing the factual judgment with confirmation. The
concordancing results also show the prevalence of ‘SHI. . .DE’ structure in news,
political reports and academic prose in ZCTC.
Fig. 10.6 ‘SHI + a. + DE’ structures in LCMC
Fig. 10.7 ‘SHI + a. + DE’ structures in ZCTC

10.5 ‘SHI’ Structure in Parallel Corpora 165
According to Li & Thompson (1981), the ‘SHI. . .DE’ structure in native Chinese
is “a special sentence type in which a nominalization is used” (Li & Thompson,
1981, p. 587), such as sentences (a) and (b):
(a) 他是前天来的。
tā shı̀ qiántiān lái de
3sg be the day before yesterday come NOM
‘The situation is that he came the day before yesterday.’
(b) 我们是从香港走的。
wǒmen shı̀ cong Xiānggǎng zǒu de
We be from Hong Kong go NOM
‘The situation is that we left from Hong Kong.’
The nominalization tendency with ‘SHI. . .DE’ structure is more common in
translated Chinese. In fact, some of the ‘SHI’ and ‘SHI. . .DE’ structures in these
sentences can be omitted without changing the sentence meaning, for example
(from ZCTC):
1) 虽然世界上大多数国家都已经实行自由市场经济,但是许多非洲国家在
腐败政府的领导下经济仍然[是]停滞不前[的]。(Literal meaning: While
most of the countries in the world have implemented a free-market economy,
the economy of many African countries under the leadership of corrupt
government remains stagnant)
2) 结果[是]高血压、心脏病和肥胖症的发病率惊人地增加,儿童们成了新一
代胖子。(Literal meaning: This result in the increase of hypertension, heart
disease and obesity, and the children become a new fat generation)
3) 全球的石油供应1/3[是]由沙特阿拉伯供应[的]。(Literal meaning: one
third of the world’s oil supply is supplied by Saudi Arabia)
4) 分析家认为, 施伦普建立一个由德国人员组成的委员会的目的,与派泽施
去盯住克莱斯勒的目的[是]一致[的], 同样是为了加强对克莱斯勒公司的
控制。(Literal meaning: The analysts believe that the purpose of Schrempp’s
establishing a German committee is the same to sending Zetsche to Chrysler.
Both the two methods are to strengthen the control of Chrysler)
5) 就目前所存在的经文来看,我们不承认这种组织的原则[是]妥当[的]。
(Literal meaning: We do not think that the principle of such organizations is
appropriate, judging from the existing scripture)
10.5 ‘SHI’ Structure in Parallel Corpora
To explore further the possible influence of the source language on the use of ‘SHI’
in translated Chinese, we focus now on a comparison between English and Chinese
parallel corpora.
Fig. 10.8 ‘SHI’ in Babel
10.5.1 Concordancing Results in the E-C Parallel Corpus
Figure 10.8 shows the concordancing results for ‘SHI’ in the Babel parallel corpus:
Figure 10.8 tells us there are 3447 occurrences of ‘SHI’in the Babel corpus. Dai
(2013b) investigated 500 samples from these hits and found that almost 90 percent
of them are influenced by the English source language.
1a) <s n¼“L1E_4210”> They are entirely sensible and coherent within the
framework of the child ’s way of knowing. </s>
1b) 在孩子们的认知框架中,他们完全是有道理的,是合乎逻辑的。
2a) <s n¼“L1E_0323”> Integrity_NN1 means_VVZ you_PPY do_VD0
what_DDQ you_PPY do_VD0 because_CS it_PPH1 ’s_VBZ right_JJ
and_CC not_XX just_RR fashionable_JJ or_CC politically_RR correct_JJ ._.
</s>
2b) <s n¼“L2C_0323”> 诚实_ad 意味着_v,_w 你_r 之所以_c 做_v 你_r 所_u
做_v 的_u 事_n 是_v 因为_p 你_r 做_v 的_u 是_v 对_p 的_u,_w 而_c 不_d
是_v 因为_p 你_r 的_u 行为_n 是_v 时髦_a 的_u 或_c 在_p 政治_n 上_f
是_v 正确_a 的_u 。_w </s>
The examples show that translators frequently opt to render forms of the English
verb ‘BE’ (such as ‘are’ and ‘is’ in the above examples) as Chinese ‘SHI’, for
example, ‘are entirely sensible’ is translated as ‘wánquán SHI yǒu daolı̌ de’
(entirely vshi vyou reason DE), ‘is right’ is translated as ‘SHI duı̀ de’ (vshi right
DE).
10.5.2 English ‘BE’ and Chinese ‘SHI’
The concordancing results in the preceding section tell us that the English equiv-
alents of ‘SHI’ consist of different forms of ‘BE’ in English (cf. Dai, 2013b,
p. 149–150). In English, there are three major classes of verbs: lexical verbs,
primary verbs (be, have, and do), and modal verbs. Lexical verbs comprise an
open class of words that function only as main verbs; the three primary verbs can
function as either main verbs or auxiliary verbs; and modal verbs can function only
as auxiliary verbs (Biber et al. 1999, p. 358). According to Quirk et al. (1985, p. 129),
the verb ‘BE’ is a main verb (with a copular function) in the following examples:
‘Anne is a happy girl’, ‘Is that building a hotel?’
‘BE’ also has two auxiliary functions, the one is as an aspect auxiliary, such as
‘Anne is learning Spanish’ and the other is as a passive auxiliary as in ‘Anne was
awarded a prize.’
‘BE’ is unique in having a full set of both finite and infinite forms in its auxiliary
function; it is also unique among English verbs in having as many as eighteen
different forms which are illustrated at Table 10.5.
The online concordancing results of ‘[vb*]’ from BNC also show some inter-
esting hits, as can be seen in Fig. 10.9.
The most frequently used forms of ‘BE’ include ‘IS’, ‘WAS’, ‘BE’, ‘ARE’, ‘’S’,
‘BEEN’, ‘BEING’, etc. Table 10.6 shows more details about the frequency of forms
of ‘BE’ in the BNC.
Table 10.5 BE in CLAWS TAGSET C8

VAB0 base form of verb ‘BE’ (auxiliary), imperative or subjunctive. Note that for this and
subsequent tags the insertion of an -A- in second position marks auxiliary use
VABDR ‘were’ (auxiliary)
VABDZ ‘was’ (auxiliary)
VABG ‘being’ (auxiliary)
VABI ‘be’ infinitive (auxiliary)
VABM ‘am’ (auxiliary)
VABN ‘been’ (auxiliary)
VABR ‘are’ (auxiliary)
VABZ ‘is’ (auxiliary)
VVB0 base form of ‘BE’ (lexical vb), imperative or subjunctive
VVBDR ‘were’ (lexical)
VVBDZ ‘was’ (lexical)
VVBG ‘being’ (lexical)
VVBI ‘be’ infinitive (lexical)
VVBM ‘am’ (lexical)
VVBN ‘been’ (lexical)
VVBR ‘are’ (lexical)
VVBZ ‘is’ (lexical)
Fig. 10.9 ‘BE’ in the online BNC
Table 10.6 BE and its No Be Frequency

frequency in BNC
1 IS 986,486
2 WAS 883,568
3 BE 651,215
4 ARE 464,964
5 WERE 312,747
6 ’S 308,984
7 BEEN 260,330
8 BEING 84,296
9 ’RE 80,759
10 ’M 62,578
11 AM 24,761
The corpus data indicate that, as a main verb, ‘BE’ has a copular function which
is equivalent to that of ‘SHI’ in modern Chinese. The prevalence of ‘BE’ in English
as a source language leads to the use of the ‘SHI’ structure with a significantly high
frequency in translated Chinese. Figure 10.10 illustrates the concordancing results
of English verb ‘is’ with a tag search in the English-Chinese parallel corpus of
Babel:
Fig. 10.10 ‘is’ in Babel
The figure shows that the total number of occurrences is 1440, and we checked
roughly ten per cent of these sentences, i.e., 140 sentences, and found out that ‘is’
has been translated into Chinese ‘SHI’ with a high ratio (98.5 per cent).
10.5.3 ‘SHI. . .DE’ Structure in Parallel Corpus
Section 10.4 discussed the ‘SHI. . .DE’ structure in the non-translated and translated
Chinese. There are 258 occurrences of ‘SHI + a. + DE’ structures in LCMC, and
346 in ZCTC. The reason for the higher frequency of ‘SHI. . .DE’ in translated
Chinese than non-translated Chinese can be found with the help of parallel corpus
data. The concordancing results of ‘SHI. . .DE’ structure in Babel English-Chinese
parallel corpus are presented in Fig. 10.11.
On analysing the English equivalents of ‘SHI. . .DE’ from these concordance
lines, we find that the English ‘BE’ structures, especially some cases of ‘BE + ADJ/
ADJ Phrase’ can be rendered into Chinese ‘SHI. . .DE’ structure, for example:
3a) <<s n¼"L1E_0091"> It_PPH1 ’s_VBZ true_JJ . </s>
3b) <s n¼"L2C_0091">这_r 是_v 真_a 的_u 。</s>
4a) <s n¼"L1E_0286"> My_APPGE grandparents_NN2 believed_VVD
you_PPY were_VBDR either_RR honest_JJ or_CC you_PPY were_VBDR
n’t_XX ._. </s>
Fig. 10.11 ‘SHI. . .DE’ structure in Babel
4b) <s n¼"L2C_0286"> 我_r 的_u 爷爷_n 和_c 奶奶_n 认为_v,_w 你_r 要么
_c 是_v 诚实_a 的_u,_w 要么_c 不_d 是_v 。_w </s>
5a) <s n¼"L1E_0323"> Integrity_NN1 means_VVZ you_PPY do_VD0
what_DDQ you_PPY do_VD0 because_CS it_PPH1 ’s_VBZ right_JJ
and_CC not_XX just_RR fashionable_JJ or_CC politically_RR correct_JJ ._.
</s>
5b) <s n¼"L2C_0323"> 诚实_ad 意味着_v,_w 你_r 之所以_c 做_v 你_r 所_u
做_v 的_u 事_n 是_v 因为_p 你_r 做_v 的_u 是_v 对_p 的_u,_w 而_c 不_d
是_v 因为_p 你_r 的_u 行为_n 是_v 时髦_a 的_u 或_c 在_p 政治_n 上_f
是_v 正确_a 的_u 。_w </s>
We concordanced one structure of ‘BE + ADJ/ADJ Phrase’, i.e., ‘is + ADJ/ADJ
Phrase’ by using tag search of ParaConc from the English-Chinese parallel corpus.
Figure 10.12 presents the concordancing results from Babel:
We analysed all the 206 occurrences of ‘is + ADJ/ADJ Phrase’ and their Chinese
translations, and found out that almost half of them have been translated into the
‘SHI. . .DE’ structures in Chinese. It’s the main reason for the prevalence of
‘SHI. . .DE’ structures in translated Chinese, for examples:
6a) The_AT paper_NN1 points_VVZ out_RP that_CST memory_NN1 is_VBZ
complex_JJ ,_, and_CC the_AT relia-bility_NN1 of_IO any_DD
person_NN1 ’s_GE recall_NN1 must_VM he_PPHS1 as-sessed_VVD
individually_RR ._. </s>
Fig. 10.12 ‘is + ADJ/ADJ Phrase’ structure in Babel
6b) <s n¼"L2C_0930"> 论文_n 指出_v ,_w 记忆_n 是_v 十分_d 复杂_a 的_u ,
_w 对_p 任何人_r 回忆_v 的_u 可靠性_n 都_d 必须_d 独立_a 地_u 进行_v
判断_v 。
7a) <s n¼"L1E_0958"> The_AT paper_NN1 says_VVZ it_PPH1 is_VBZ
impossible_JJ to_TO distinguish_VVI a_AT1 true_NN1 from_II a_AT1
false_JJ memory_NN1 and_CC it_PPH1 is_VBZ dangerous_JJ to_TO
use_VVI confidence_NN1 ,_, vividness_NN1 and_CC detail_NN1 as_CSA
indicating_VVG truth_NN1 ._. </s>
7b) <s n¼"L2C_0958"> 论文_n 认为_v ,_w 要_v 区分_v 记忆_n 真实_a 与否
_u 是_v 不_d 可能_v 的_u 。_w 而且_c ,_w 用_v 自信_an 、_w 生动_a 以
及_c 详细_ad 作为_v 判断_v 真实性_n 的_u 标志_n 是_v 很_d 危险_a 的
_u 。_w </s>
8a) <s n¼"L1E_1640"> This_DD1 function_NN1 is_VBZ identical_JJ to_II
that_DD1 of_IO other_JJ cargo_NN1 firms_NN2 operating_VVG in_II
the_AT world_NN1 ._. "_" </s>
8b) <s n¼"L2C_1640"> 这_r 与_p 世界_n 上_f 其他_r 货运_n 公司_n 的_u
业务_n 是_v 完全_ad 一样_a 的_u "_w 。_w </s>
The further analyses of these ‘SHI. . .DE’ structures in translated Chinese offer
more information about the ‘SHI’ structure in Chinese, for ‘SHI’ can be used as a
focus marker in these ‘SHI. . .DE’ structures. Actually, the use of ‘SHI’ as a focus
marker has been accepted in non-translated Chinese. Dai (2013b) discusses the
influence of translated Chinese on the non-translated language with respect to the
focus marker ‘SHI’. The development of ‘COPULA > FOCUS’ is a general ten-
dency of language grammaticalization, and Chinese ‘SHI’ is one example (Heine &
Kuteva, 2002, p. 96).
The emergence of the focus marker ‘SHI’ is the result of language development.
‘SHI’ functions as a demonstrative pronoun during the pre-Qin dynasty (about BC
221), and it then developed into a copula (Wang, 1990, p. 382; Shi & Li, 2001). The
hybridity feature in translated Chinese can exert an important influence on language
development (Dai, 2013b). Translation, as a special kind of language contact, plays
a key role in language change, as McEnery & Xiao (2008) argue:
It is true that languages in contact can influence each other, but this influence is different
from the influence of a source language on translations with regard to immediacy and
scope. Basically, the influence of languages in contact is generally gradual
(or evolutionary) and less systematic than the influence of a source language on the
translated language (McEnery & Xiao, 2008, p. 25).
Language contact through translation (LCTT) is a particular source of contact-

induced language change(Kranich, Becher, & H€oder, 2011). The comparison
between ‘BE’ and ‘SHI’ in English and Chinese respectively demonstrates a good
example of LCTT.
The concordance results also show the increasing tendency of the following
grammatical features, such as subject, ‘DE’ structure in the translated Chinese and
these grammatical features are also related to the usage of ‘SHI’ structure.
10.6 Conclusions
The present chapter has investigated ‘SHI’ and its related structures, namely ‘SHI
+ YI GE’, ‘SHI. . .DE’, etc. in translated Chinese through comparable and parallel
corpora.
The concordancing results of ‘SHI’ structures from comparable corpora show
that they are used more frequently and commonly in translated Chinese than in
non-translated Chinese, and they also illustrate some hybridity features in translated
Chinese, especially for the collocations of ‘SHI’ in translated Chinese present
hybrid tendencies.
The main reason for the high frequency of ‘SHI. . .DE’ structures in translated
Chinese is the influence of the source language in the translation processes, for the
‘BE + ADJ/ADJ Phrase’ structures in English are often rendered into Chinese
‘SHI. . .DE’ structures. The English source language also exerts influence on
translated Chinese with respect to the frequent use of the focus marker ‘SHI’.
References 173
The high frequencies of ‘SHI YI GE’ and ‘SHI. . .DE’ structures also exert great
influence on the nominalization tendency in translated Chinese. This tendency will
also be explored in the following chapter.
References
Biber, D., S. Johansson, G. Leech, S. Conrad, and E. Finegan (eds.). 1999. Longman Grammar of
Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Dai, G. 2013b. Fanyi zhong Yuanyu Touguo Xiao Yanjiu (“SL Shining Through” in translated
商务印书馆.]
Heine, B., and T. Kuteva. 2002. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Kranich, S., V. Becher, and S. H€oder. 2011. A tentative typology of translation-induced language
change. In Multilingual Discourse Production: Diachronic and Synchronic Perspectives,
ed. S. Kranich, V. Becher, S. H€oder, and J. House, 11–43. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John
Benjamins Pub. Co.
Li, J. 1987. Tan you SHI Goucheng de Panduanju de Jiben Xingshi Jiqi Luoji Yiyi (Judgement
sentences formed by SHI: Basic forms and logic meanings). Dongjiang Xuekan, (4), 61–64. [李
健. (1987). 谈由 “是”构成的判断句的基本形式及其逻辑意义. hh东疆学刊ii, (4), 61–64.]
Li, C., and S. Thompson. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar.
u, S. 1999. Xiandai Hanyu Babaici (Modern Chinese: 800 words, revised edition). Beijing:
L€
McEnery, T., and R. Xiao. 2008. Parallel and Comparable Corpora: What is Happening? In
Incorporating Corpora The Linguist and the Translator, ed. G. Anderman and M. Rogers,
18–31. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters LTD.
Qi, H., and Q. Zhang. (2005). ‘Shi. . .De’ ju Yanjiu Shuping (A review of researches on
‘SHI. . .DE’ sentences). Journal of Radio & TV University (Philosophy & Social Sciences),
(4), 37–40. [齐沪扬,张秋杭. (2005). “是. . .. . .的”句研究述评. hh广播电视大学学报(哲学社
会科学版)ii, (4), 37–40.]
Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech, and J. Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the
English Language. London/New York: Longman.
Shi, Y. 2005a. Lun Panduan, Jiaodian, Qiangdiao yu Duibi zhi Guanxi: SHI de Yufa Gongneng he
Shiyong Tiaojian (The relationship between copula, focus, emphasis and comparison: The
function and usage of Shi). Yuyan Yanjiu (Studies in Language and Linguistics) , 25(4), 43–53.
[石毓智. (2005a). 论判断、焦点、强调与对比之关系——“是”的语法功能和使用条件.
hh语言研究ii, 25(4), 43–53.]
Shi, Y. 2005b. Panduanci ‘SHI’ Goucheng Lianci de Gainian Jichu (The conceptual foundation of
the copula ‘SHI’ as a morphoeme of conjunctions). Hanyu Xuexi (Chinese Language Learn-
ing), (5), 3–10. [石毓智. (2005b). 判断词”是”构成连词的概念基础. hh汉语学习ii, (5), 3–10.]
Shi, Y., and J. Xu. 2001. Hanyushishang Yiwenju Xingshi de Leixingxue Zhuanbian jiqi Jizhi(The
process and mechanism of the typological change of the question form in the history of
Chinese: the emergence of the focus marker SHI and its effects). Zhongguo Yuwen (Studies
of the Chinese Language), (5), 454–466. [石毓智,徐杰. (2001). 汉语史上疑问形式的类型学

转变及其机制——焦点标记”是”的产生及其影响. hh中国语文ii,(5), 454–466.]
Shi, Y., and N. Li. 2001. Hanyu Yufahua de Licheng: Xingtai Jufa Fazhan de Dongyin he Jizhi
(A history of grammaticalization in Chinese: Motivations and mechanisms of evolution of
Chinese Morpho-syntax). Beijing: Beijing Daxue Chubanshe. [石毓智,李讷. (2001). hh汉语语
法化的历程:形态句法发展的动因和机制ii. 北京: 北京大学出版社.]
of Wang Li, volume 11, A history of Chinese grammar and vocabulary). Jinan: Shandong
Edecation Press. [王力. (1990). hh王力文集(第11卷)汉语语法史;汉语词汇史ii. 济南: 山东教
育出版社.]
出版社.]
Xiao, R., and X. Hu. 2015. Corpus-Based Studies of Translational Chinese in English-Chinese
Translation. Berlin: Springer.
Xu, J. 2001. Pubianyufa Yuanze yu Hanyu Yufa Xianxiang (Grammatical principles and gram-
matical phenomena). Beijing: Beijing Daxue Chubanshe. [徐杰. (2001). hh普遍语法原则与汉
语语法现象ii. 北京: 北京大学出版社.]
Zhang, B. (ed.). 2010. Xiandai Hanyu Miaoxie Yufa (A descriptive grammar of modern Chinese).
Zhao, S. (1979). Guanyu ‘SHI. . .De’ Ju (On ‘SHI. . .DE’ structure). Yuyan Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu
(Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies), (1), 57–66.[赵淑华. (1979). 关于 “是. . .. . .
的”句. hh语言教学与研究ii,(1), 57–66.]
Zhu, D. (1999). Zhu Dexi Wenji Diyijuan: Yufa Jiangyi, Yufawenda, Dingyu he Zhuangyu (The
complete works of Zhu Dexi, volume 1: Lectures on grammar, Qs & As to grammar, attribu-
tives and adverbials). Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [朱德熙. (1999). hh朱德熙文集(第1卷)
语法讲义、语法答问、定语和状语ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
Chapter 11
Nominalization and Cohesive Features in TC
Abstract This chapter focuses the nominalization and cohesive features in trans-
lated Chinese. It introduces the nominalization methods in Chinese and presents the
different frequencies of nominalization markers in translated and native Chinese.
The frequencies of the cohesive markers including prepositions and conjunctions in
translated and native Chinese are different. Translated Chinese adopts a statistically
signficantly higher frequency of cohesive devices which make TC logically and
grammatically more explicit than native Chinese.
11.1 Introduction
As we have seen in the preceding chapters, hybridity in Chinese translated from

English is evident at lexical and syntactic levels. This penultimate chapter investi-
gates two further important hybridity features in translated Chinese, i.e.,
nominalization and cohesive features, the latter of which takes us into the area of
textual organization, or discourse.
Nominalization has been indirectly involved in the previous chapters, in the
discussions of affixation, suffixes, DV constructions, the classifier and its construc-
tions, light verbs and ‘SHI YI GE’/‘SHI. . .DE’ structures. All these linguistic
features are closely related to nominalization, and so it is worth taking time to
consider this topic on its own.
11.2 Nominalization
The term “nominalization” means in essence turning something into a noun

(Comrie and Thompson 2007, p. 334). Different languages adopt different methods
for nominalization. Gerner (2012) discusses some types of nominalization in Asian
languages, in relation to morphology, syntax, semantics and pragmatics.
Morphological nominalization includes such operations as adding a free mor-
pheme to the verb form (such as Chinese nominalizer suo所), affix (prefix, infix,

DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-0742-2_11
176 11 Nominalization and Cohesive Features in TC
suffix), suppletion, reduplication; using explicit markers of the nominal form,

whether the case is nominative, accusative, ergative, genitive, dative/benefactive,
and locative; possessive morpheme, classifiers, plural markers, determiners, etc.
Syntactic methods of indicating nominalization include using v-nominalizers,
nonfinite clause nominalizers, etc. (Gerner 2012, pp. 806-820).
The following section of the chapter will give further details of some basic
methods of nominalization in Chinese and discuss how they contribute to the
hybridity of translated Chinese.
11.2.1 Nominalization Methods in Chinese
In Chinese, basic nominalization methods include the grammatical processes by

which “a verb, a verb phrase, a sentence, or a portion of a sentence including the
verb can function as a noun phrase” (Li and Thompson 1981, p. 575). Zhu (1983)
differentiates between the methods of nominalization for the predicating words in
English and Chinese. English predicating words (such as verbs, adjectives) can
change into nouns by two methods: one is self-referent, changing a verb or adjective
into a noun by adding affixes (e.g. the adjective of ‘kind’ can be changed into a
noun, ‘kindness’, by adding the suffix ‘-ness’), the other is other-referent, changing
a verb or adjective into a noun by conversion (such as the verb ‘hope’ can change
into a noun). By contrast, Chinese predicating words can change into nouns
directly, i.e. with no change in form, and they lack the self-referent method of
adding affixes (Zhu 1983).
Zhu does discuss some nominalization markers, such as ‘de’ (的), ‘suo’ (所),
‘zhe’ (者), and ‘zhi’ (之) in detail. The main nominalization method in Chinese
involves adding ‘de’ (的) after a verb, a verb phrase, a sentence, or a portion of a
sentence including the verb (Li and Thompson 1981, p. 575). That is to say, the
‘VP’ can be nominalized as ‘VP + DE’ (VP的) as the following examples: ‘chı̄’ (吃
eat)—‘chı̄de’ (吃的food), ‘zhòngshuǐdao’ (种水稻planting rice)—‘zhòngshuǐdao
de’ (种水稻的rice growers) (Zhu 1983, p. 17).
The other nominalization methods include adding ‘zhi’ (之) and ‘zhe’ (者) to the
sentence, and these two nominalization markers are descended from classical
Chinese (Zhu 1983, p. 18). Eifring (1995) shows that ‘zhi’ (之) and ‘zhe’ (者)
can be used as nominalization markers for adverbial clauses (Eifring 1995), for
example:
(1) 国之将兴明神降之
gu
o zhı̄ jiāng xı̄ng mı́ngshén jiang zhi
country subordinator-zhi will rise illustrious spirit descend 3sg
‘When a country is about to rise, the illustrious spirits will descend on it.’
11.2 Nominalization 177
(2) 使城坏者不得复筑也
Shǐ chéng huai zhě budě fuzhǔ ye
if city-wall destroy nominalizer-zhe negative can again build particle
‘If the city walls were to be destroyed, they could not be rebuilt’
(cited from Eifring 1995, pp. 37–38).
According to L€u (1999), the classical ‘zhi’ (之) functions in the same way as
modern ‘de’ (的) in the structure of ‘NP + zhi + VP’, and this indicates that the
structure is nominalized (L€u 1999, p. 673). ‘Zhe’ (者) in classical Chinese is used as
a pronoun and means a person, thing, object, or a concept of time, place, etc. It can
be understood as ‘de’ (的), ‘deren’ (的人), ‘dedōngxı̄’ (的东西), ‘deshı̀qı́ng’ (的事
情), etc. (Guhanyu Changyongzi Zidian Bianxiezu 2003, p. 543). The classical ‘zhi’
(之) is still used in modern written Chinese.
‘Zhe’ (者) has developed into a nominalization marker (NOM) and suffix
(tagged as ‘k’ in ICTCLAS 2008) in modern Chinese and it now means a kind of
person with some characteristics or beliefs, or someone who does certain types of
job. It can be used with two kinds of structures, one is ‘NP + zhe’ (名词 + 者), and
the other is ‘VP + zhe’ (动/形容词 + 者), as in ‘yı̄wugōngzuòzhě’ (医务工作者
medical worker: NP + zhe), ‘biānzhě’ (编者editor: V + zhe), ‘hégézhě’ (合格者
the eligible: A + zhe), ‘qiángzhě’ (强者the strong/stronger/strongest: A + zhe).
‘zhe’ (者) can also means something or someone with two kinds of collocation,
i.e., ‘qián / hòu zhě’ (前/后者the former/latter), and ‘numeral + zhe’ (数词 + 者, i.e.,
liǎngzhě两者two persons/things) (L€u 1999, p. 673).
The following section will explore the features of some nominalization markers
11.2.2 Nominalization Markers in Non-translated

and Translated Chinese
The section discusses nominalization markers in native and translated Chinese.

Figures 11.1 and 11.2 show the classical ‘zhi’ (之) in LCMC and ZCTC
respectively:
Figure 11.1 tells us the occurrences of classical ‘zhi’ (之) in LCMC are 1205,
while the concordancing results of ‘zhi’ (之) in ZCTC are 874 occurrences in
Fig. 11.2 (LL ¼ 51.00, p < 0.001).
As discussed in the previous section, the classical ‘zhi’ (之) functioned as the
modern auxiliary word of ‘de’ (的), and it is still used in modern Chinese, especially
by the writers and translators who favor the traditional style of Chinese, imitating
the classical Chinese, so it is reasonable to expect that non-translated Chinese uses
more examples of classical ‘zhi’ (之) than the translated Chinese. We might also
expect non-translated Chinese to exhibit a greater preference for the use of ‘zhi’
(之) within the structure of ‘NP + zhi + VP ’in LCMC than ZCTC. Figures 11.3 and
11.4 confirm that this is so:
Fig. 11.1 classical ‘zhi’ (之) in LCMC
Fig. 11.2 classical ‘zhi’ (之) in ZCTC
Figure 11.3 tells us that there are 31 occurrences of ‘NP + zhi + VP ’ in the
non-translated Chinese, while there are just 17 examples of the same structure in the
corpus of translated Chinese (see Fig. 11.4).
Fig. 11.3 ‘NP þ zhi þ VP’ in LCMC
Fig. 11.4 ‘NP þ zhi þ VP’ in ZCTC
The classical structure ‘NP + zhi + VP’ developed into the modern Chinese
structure ‘NP + DE + VP’, which was discussed in Chap. 7. The results of ‘NP
+ DE + VP’ in LCMC and ZCTC differ here from the results presented in Chap. 7
because we have changed the scope of the searches of ‘NP’ and ‘VP’ in the present
chapter, i.e., the NP includes all the annotations of ‘nouns’: ‘n’ (noun), ‘nr’ (person
name), ‘nr1’ (Chinese surname), ‘nr2’ (Chinese given name), ‘nrj’ (Japanese person
Fig. 11.5 ‘NP þ DE þ VP’ in LCMC
name), ‘nrf’ (transliterated foreign name), ‘ns’ (place name), ‘nsf’ (transliterated
place name), ‘nt’ (organisation name), ‘nl’ (nominal formulaic expression), ‘ng’
(nominal morpheme), and ‘nz’ (other proper name), and VP includes all the
annotations of ‘verbs’: ‘v’ (verb), ‘vd’ (adverbial use of verb), ‘vn’ (nominal use
of verb), ‘vshi’ (verb SHI是), ‘vyou’ (verb YOU有), ‘vf’ (directional verb), ‘vx’
(pro-verb, light verb), ‘vi’ (intransitive verb), ‘vl’ (verbal formulaic expression),
and ‘vg’ (verbal morpheme). Figures 11.5 and 11.6 show the structure of ‘NP + DE
+ VP’ in LCMC and ZCTC respectively:
Figures 11.5 and 11.6 show that the translated Chinese uses more ‘NP + DE
+ VP’ structure than the non-translated Chinese (LCMC: ZCTC ¼ 4069: 4230, LL
value: 4.15, p < 0.05). occurrences of ‘NP + DE+ VP’ are nominalized as a noun
phrase structure in most of the sentences from the concordancing results, and we
can trace some influence of the classical usage of ‘zhi’ (之) as the subordinator
between NP and VP. We also concordanced ‘zhi’ (之) from Babel, and found out
that most of the occurrences have been translated from the English structures “N’s/
A/N of/ Gerund of/ + N” which were explored in Sect. 7.4.1, Chap. 7. Figure 11.7
illustrates the concordancing results of ‘zhi’ (之) in Babel, for example:
(1a) <s n ¼ "L1E_0176" > In_II this_DD1 way_NN1 ,_, love_NN1
becomes_VVZ something_PN1 far_RG more_RGR powerful_JJ than_CSN
bone_NN1 and_CC flesh_NN1 ._. </s>
(1b) <s n ¼ "L2C_0176" > 因此_c ,_w 这种_r 爱_v 具有_v 血肉_n 之_u 躯_ng
远远_d 不_d 及_v 的_u 力量_n 。_w </s>
(2a) <s n ¼ "L1E_0969" > And_CC in_II this_DD1 city_NN1 of_IO
dreams_NN2 anything_PN1 is_VBZ possible_JJ ._. </s>
(2b) <s n ¼ "L2C_1015" > 在_p 那个_r 梦想_n 之_u 城_n ,_w 任何_r 事_n 都
_d 可能_v 发生_v 。_w </s>
Fig. 11.6 ‘NP þ DE þ VP’ in ZCTC
Fig. 11.7 ‘zhi’ (之) in Babel
We turn now to the relative distribution of the nominalizer ‘zhe’ (者) in

non-translated and translated Chinese. Figures 11.8 and 11.9 represent the
concordancing results of ‘zhe’ (者) in LCMC and ZCTC respectively:
Fig. 11.8 ‘zhe’ (者) in LCMC
Fig. 11.9 ‘zhe’ (者) in ZCTC
The figures show that the frequencies of occurrence of ‘zhe’ (者) in LCMC is
496, while it is 676 in ZCTC (LL ¼ 28.82 for 1 d.f., p < 0.001); the difference
between non-translated and translated Chinese with respect to ‘zhe’ (者) is
significant.
Fig. 11.10 ‘zhe’ (者) as NOM in Babel
The classical ‘zhe’ (者) is used more commonly in translated Chinese than
non-translated Chinese, and it is different from the classical ‘zhi’ (之) discussed
at above. A further comparison of the use of ‘zhe’ (者) between LCMC and ZCTC
indicates that ‘zhe’ (者) is used as a suffix, nominalization marker (NOM), and it
expresses various meanings mentioned at the end of the previous section in the
present chapter.
The collocation list of ‘zhe’ (者) in ZCTC (with a span of left 1: right 0) shows
the parts of speech ‘vn, v, vi, n’, and this differs greatly from the collocation list for
the same item in LCMC, especially with respect to ‘vn’ (the nominal use of verb).
In order to explore the reasons for the higher frequency of ‘zhe’ (者) in translated
Chinese, we concordanced it in the Babel parallel corpus. Figure 11.10 shows a
concordance screenshot of ‘zhe’ (者) as NOM in the Babel:
Figure 11.10 presents part of the concordancing results of 182 occurrences.
Detailed analyses of these occurrences suggest that most of the English equivalents
of ‘zhe’ (者) are nouns derived from action verbs or adjectives, such as: ‘shopper’
(gòuw uzhě购物者), ‘the faithful and the cheater’ (zhōngchéngzhě yǔ
buzhōngzhě忠诚者与不忠者), ‘adventurer’ (maoxiǎnzhě 冒险者), ‘wrestler’
(bodòuzhě 搏斗者), ‘winner’ (chénggōngzhě成功者), ‘pessimist’
(bēiguānzhǔyı̀zhě悲观主义者), ‘participant’ (cānyuzhě 参与者), etc. The contras-
tive studies of English and Chinese in the preceding chapters (see Sect. 7.4 for
example) tell us that English uses more action nouns which can influence the
translation as a consequence of the literal translation strategy. This fact may
account for the higher frequency of ‘zhe’ (者) in translated Chinese than in
non-translated Chinese.
The results discussed in this section indicate that modern Chinese is increasingly
using nominalization markers, and that this can be regarded as the influence of
language contact and in particular, translation.
11.3 Cohesive Features in Translated Chinese
In general, Chinese sentence structure is paratactic, while English is hypotactic.

That is to say, English uses connectives, such as conjunctions, prepositions, relative
pronouns, relative adverbs, etc., for the juxtaposition of syntactic units, while
Chinese depends on semantic or logical relations and word order for the textual
organization of the sentences. Given the general differences in the languages, it is
reasonable to suppose that cohesion is a likely candidate to show hybridity in
translated Chinese. The present section investigates the hybridity features of cohe-
sion in translated Chinese, focusing on Chinese prepositions and conjunctions.
11.3.1 Cohesive Methods in Modern Chinese
Prepositions and conjunctions conjoin words, phrases or sentences to make a text

cohesive.
Wang (1984) explains that Chinese uses conjunctions rarely, for the Chinese
compound sentences or complex sentences rely on parataxis and so the scope for
using conjunctions is limited (Wang 1984, pp. 89-90). And according to L€u (1979)
and Wang (1985), Chinese has a scarcity of prepositions. Lian (1993) offers a short
list of prepositions (about 30) and explains that most of these prepositions are
derived from verbs, such as ‘jiao’ (叫by), ‘rang’ (让by), ‘ná’ (拿with), ‘zai’ (在at),
‘tı̀’ (替for, on behalf of), ‘bǐ’ (比than), ‘yan’ (沿along), etc. As a closed set,
“prepositions are fairly limited in number”, but most of them are used frequently,
and they can be divided into the following groups based on meaning: direction,
time, reason, basis, concerning, passiveness, comparison, etc. (Lin 2001, p. 112).
11.3.2 Prepositions and Conjunctions in Non-TC and TC
The concordancing results of a search for prepositions in non-translated Chinese

corpus (LCMC) and translated Chinese corpus (ZCTC) are: LCMC 34,376: ZCTC
38,674 (LL ¼ 278.89 for 1.d.f., p <0.001). This result indicates that prepositions
appear significantly more frequently in translated Chinese than that in native
Chinese. The analyses also tell us that the prepositional categories in translated
11.3 Cohesive Features in Translated Chinese 185
Chinese are much more than in native Chinese, and many prepositions in translated
Chinese are translated from English directly, such as ‘zuòwéi’ (作为) translated
from English ‘as’, ‘anzhao’ (按照) translated from the English prepositional phrase
‘in accordance with’, and ‘chúle’ (偉了) translated from English preposition
‘except’, etc.
He (2004) investigates the use of prepositions in modern written Chinese under
the influence of English, and his findings indicate that some prepositions, such as
‘guanyu’ (关于as to, about), are translated from the English prepositions, ‘as to, for,
about’ etc.
The frequencies of conjunctions in LCMC and ZCTC are 24,892 and 31,175
respectively, results achieved by using the concordancing tags of ‘c’(conjunction)
and ‘cc’ (coordinating conjunction). The log-likelihood test results show a signif-
icant difference between LCMC and ZCTC (LL ¼ 742.95 for 1.d.f., p <0.001). The
frequency of conjunctions in translated Chinese shows significantly higher LL
values relative to their counterparts in non-translated Chinese.
In order to explore the reasons for the higher frequency of cohesive features in
translated Chinese, we carried out a detailed case study of ‘rúguǒ’ (如果) in the next
section.
11.3.3 Cohesive Features in TC: A Case Study

of ‘rúguǒ’ (如果)
An analysis of the concordancing results for conjunctions in translated Chinese

indicate patterns that we associate with hybridity. We take as an example, ‘rúguǒ’
(如果if), one of the most frequently used conjunctions in Chinese (LCMC 601:
ZCTC 1373, LL ¼ 314.68 for 1.d.f., p <0.001).
Figure 11.11 presents the concordancing results of ‘rúguǒ’ (如果) in ZCTC
where it has a frequency of 1373:
In modern Chinese, the conjunction ‘rúguǒ’ (如果) can be used at the beginning
of a conditional clause, and the following main clause will draw the conclusion
from the condition (L€u 1999, p. 469), as in sentences (a) and (b):
(a) (如果) 有机会, 我会去香港拜访你。
(Rúguǒ) yǒu jı̄huı̀ wǒ huı̀ qu xiānggǎng baifǎng nǐ
If have chance I will go Hong Kong call on you
‘I’ll call on you if I have the chance to go to Hong Kong.’
(b) (如果) 有车的话, 我们可以送你到机场。

(Rúguǒ) yǒu chē de hua wǒmen kěyǐ sòng nǐ dao jı̄chǎng
If have car DE saying we can drive you arrive airport
‘We can drive you to the airport if we have a car.’
Fig. 11.11 ‘rúguǒ’ (如果) in ZCTC
Actually, in most cases, ‘rúguǒ’ (如果) can be omitted from the structure in
Chinese without changing the meaning of the sentence, so sentence (a) and (b) can
omit ‘rúguǒ’ (如果) in daily communication. However, it cannot be omitted in the
structure of ‘rúguǒ. . .dehua’(如果. . .的话) when the structure is used as the second
clause after the main clause as in sentences (c) and (d):
(c) 我明天再来, 如果你现在有事的话。
Wǒ mı́ngtiān zai lái rúguǒ nǐ xianzai yǒu shı̀ de hua
I tomorrow again come if you now have thing DE saying
‘I’ll come here tomorrow if you are busy now.’
(d) 他今天该到了, 如果昨天动身的话。
Tā jı̄ntiān gāi dao le rúguǒ zuotiān dòngshēn de hua
He today should arrive PERF if yesterday set off DE saying
‘He should have reached here if set off yesterday.’
An analysis of every concordance line for ‘rúguǒ’ (如果) indicates that there is
only one occurrence of ‘rúguǒ’ (如果) used in the second clause from the
non-translated Chinese corpus, LCMC:
‘每当看到他满意地嘿嘿一笑时,我心里总泛起一阵阵的苦涩,如果他是我的
爷爷呢?’
By contrast, there are 23 occurrences of ‘rúguǒ’ (如果) used in the second clause
from the translated Chinese corpus, ZCTC; they are:
(1) 或许有别的什么我下意识一直压抑着的事情——如果这种说法对头的
话。
(2) 典型的硅谷VC就学过Standford或Berkeley大学,在Apple、Sun或Oracle
公司工作过,在进入风险投资界之前,至少在一家以上的高科技公司里
创业,如果不是CEO至少也是个高级经理。
(3) 无论是谁纠正中美关系,都应得政治奖,如果有人授予政治奖的话。
(4) 你可以占有我,爵爷,如果你将娶我。
(5) 也带辛西娅来,如果你高兴。
(6) 邦德说,他只想吃两根阿伯罗斯熏肠——如果她还有存货的话。
(7) 美国仍然拥有非常健康、非常平衡的经济,在一段时间内可以不费劲地
承担全球经济唯一火车头的作用,如果需要它承担这种作用的话。
(8) 坦率地说,我一向乐意为任何人做这种事,如果这样做有助于创造财富
的话. . .. . .。
(9) 布什政府正在采取一切能够采取的手段来羞辱这位伊拉克领导人,比
如,扼杀他的经济,强行检查他的武器,如果必要的话恢复空袭等。
(10) 但令人遗憾的是,内联模式需要额外花费600美元的软件升级费用(如果
从Fluke网站下载,则需695美元)。
(11) 最近召开的“公司治理结构:来自转轨经济的教训”的会议第一次把关注
的焦点集中到相反的地方:转轨国家的改革经验——如果有的话——教
给了我们关于公司治理结构理论方面哪些一般性的东西?
(12) 规模经济可代替比较优势用于解释国际贸易的观点,如果不能在亚当?
(13) 毛泽东告诉斯诺,尼克松可以秘密地来,如果他希望这样。
(14) 这时万韦看上去就像要一脚将我踢到桌子底下去,如果我们坐在一起的
话。
(15) (b)如果,当根据第VI部分,公司总收入中,所有可分配收入的25%以上,或
者在不是与存款相关的选择计划的分配选择计划的情况下,超过10%的
可分配收入被派给他及他的合伙人(如果有的话),或给他的任何合伙人,
或全部这些合伙人。
(16) (c)授权的官员有正当理由确信关于申请者又作出的申请中的所有相关
信息被审议后,如果能确定:
(17) 但是我们对文化的观念(包括传统和习俗),按照以前的概念,可以很容易
地解释为何传统在发展中起到的是限制作用:如果我们误解其意;
(18) 普拉厄尔还提到一件恶俗的物品,”可以往没喝完的餐酒瓶子里泵氮气,
有利于保存酒质(如果不是为了子孙后代的话),至少一两天之后你回头
再喝它的时候仍然是新鲜的。”
(19) 问题就在这里,兰德里——如果安妮不是克利夫?
(20) 我想我的身体很好,我是指健康,如果这是你要问的意思的话。
(21) 我带你去听音乐会,然后我们去吃个宵夜,如果你不想再见我. . .. . .
(22) 丹尼踌躇,好不容易才开口说道:“如果那真是你想要的. . .. . .”
(23) “确实是的,先生,”教授回答说,“尤其是如果你历史没考及格。”
Fig. 11.12 ‘if’ clauses and phrases in BNC (sample)
These examples demonstrate the influence of the English source language on the
translator. The translations follow the source language sentence order which seems
strange in non-translated Chinese. In English, it is a common phenomenon for a
conditional clause (if-clause) to occur after the main clause. The concordancing of
‘if’ clauses (after the main clause) in the BNC produces more than 30,000 occur-
rences. For example: ‘He’d not be in hospital at the moment, if he hadn’t eaten too
much.’ Figure 11.12 illustrates sample of the concordancing results:
If all the translations of these English sentences follow the word order of the
source language, we can get sentences like the examples from ZCTC listed above,
which look strange and even unacceptable in non-translated Chinese. Actually,
most of the English ‘if-clause’ sentences in Babel parallel corpus have been
translated into Chinese following the source language word order. For example:
<s n ¼ "L1E_3780" > She_PPHS1 smiled_VVD at_II me_PPIO1 ,_, if_CS
you_PPY can_VM call_VVI it_PPH1 that_DD1 ._. (<s n ¼ "L2C_3780" > 她_r
对_p 着_u 我_r 微笑_v -_w 如果_c 那_r 能_v 称为_v 微笑_v 的_u 话_n 。)
Figure 11.13 illustrates the concordancing results of ‘if-clause’ in Babel:
We also concordanced ‘rúguǒ + shuo’ (如果说) structure and its English equiv-
alents in the English-Chinese parallel corpus. Figure 11.14 shows the
concordancing result from Babel:
Examples from the concordancing results tell us that some of the English source
sentences are subjunctive which can be a “stylistically somewhat marked variant of
other constructions” (Quirk, et al. 1985, pp. 155-156) that can be used to indicate
Fig. 11.13 ‘if’ clause in Babel
Fig. 11.14 ‘rúguǒ þ shuo’ (如果说) in Babel
condition. All the formal and informal subjunctive sentences can be translated into
Chinese using ‘rúguǒ + shuo’ (如果说) as shown in the following sentences:
(1a) <s n ¼ “L1E_1836” > If_CS journalism_NN1 were_VBDR a_AT1
sport_NN1 ,_, these_DD2 men_NN2 and_CC women_NN2 would_VM
be_VBI the_AT extreme_JJ junkies_NN2 ._.
(1b) <s n ¼ “L2C_1836” > 如果_c 说_v 新闻_n 报道_v 是_v 一_m 项_q 体育
_n 活动_vn ,_w 那么_c 这些_r 男男女女_l 就是_v 最最_d 投入_v 的_u
人_n 。_w
(2a) <s n ¼ “L1E_3491” > If_CS it_PPH1 was_VBDZ Caneras_NN2

who_PNQS brought_VVD them_PPHO2 together_RL it_PPH1 is_VBZ
football_NN1 which_DDQ holds_VVZ them_PPHO2 there_RL ._. </s>
(2b) <s n ¼ “L2C_3491” > 如果_c 说_v 是_v 卡雷拉斯_nr 使_v 他们_r 走_v
到_v 了_u 一起_s ,_w 不如_v 说是_v 足球_n 使_v 他们_r 守_v 在_p 了_u
一起_s 。_w </s>
The analyses of the concordancing results of ‘rúguǒ’ (如果) also tell us that its
distribution and use can be considered hybrid features of translated Chinese. It
collocates with more word categories in translated Chinese, with higher z-scores
than that in non-translated Chinese, such as ‘vyou’(verb有), ‘ulian’ (emphatic连),
‘rz’ (deictic pronoun), and ‘mq’(numeral classifier). All these usages demonstrate
different lexical, syntactic and semantic patterns compared to the non-translated
Chinese corpus.
11.4 Conclusions
The chapter has investigated two important hybridity features in translated Chinese,
nominalization, and selected cohesive devices.
The evidence suggests a significantly greater frequency of nominalization
markers being used in translated Chinese, which has the effect of making the
translated texts more explicit lexically, which may also be a characteristic of the
academic prose being translated.
The chapter also shows us that translated Chinese adopts a statistically signifi-
cantly higher frequency of cohesive devices, such as prepositions and conjunctions,
to organize the sentences and discourse which make translated Chinese logically
and grammatically more explicit than non-translated Chinese. The overall effect is
to shift more paratactic Chinese in the direction of more hypotactic English.
The further detailed analyses of case study of ‘rúguǒ’ (如果) in translated
Chinese presented a complex phenomenon in translation. The conjunction ‘rúguǒ’
(如果) in translated Chinese texts is used differently from the way it is used in
non-translated Chinese.
References
“Guhanyu Changyongzi Zidian” Bianxiezu. (ed). 2003. Guhanyu Changyongzi Zidian (Ancient
Chinese Commonly Used Words Dictionary). Lanzhou: Gansu Education Press. [hh古汉语常用
字字典ii编写组. (2003). hh古汉语常用字字典ii. 兰州: 甘肃教育出版社.]
Comrie, B., and S.A. Thompson. 2007. Lexical nominalization. In Language typology and
syntactic description, Grammatical categories and the Lexicon, vol. 3, 2nd ed,
ed. T. Shopen, 334–381. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Eifring, H. 1995. Clause combination in Chinese. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
References 191
Gerner, M. 2012. The typology of nominalization. Language and Linguistics 13(4): 803–844.
He, Y. 2004. Cong Xiandai Hanyu Jiechuzhong de Ouhua Xianxiang kan Jianjie Yuyan Jiechu
(Indirectional language contact from Europeanization of modern Chinese). Applied Linguis-
tics, (4), 82–89.[贺阳. (2004). 从现代汉语接触中的欧化现象看间接语言接触. hh语言文字
应用ii, (4), 82–89.]
Lian, S. 1993. Yinghan Duibi Yanjiu (Contrastive Studies of English and Chinese). Beijing:
Lin, H. 2001. A grammar of Mandarin Chinese: Languages of the World/materials. Munich:
Lincom Europa.
u, S. 1979. Hanyu Yufa Fenxi Wenti (Analysis of Chinese Grammar Problmes). Beijing:
L€
Shangwu Yinshuguan. [吕叔湘. (1979). hh汉语语法分析问题ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
u, S. 1999. Xiandai Hanyu Babaici (Modern Chinese: 800 Words, Revised Edition). Beijing:
L€
Wang, L. 1984. Wang Li Wenji Diyijuan: Zhongguo Yufa Lilun (The Complete Works of Wang Li,
Volume 1, Chinese Grammar Theory). Jinan: Shandong Edecation Press. [王力. (1984). hh王力
Wang, L. 1985.Wang Li Wenji Di’erjuan: Zhongguo Xiandai Yufa (The Complete Works of Wang
Li, Volume 2, Modern Chinese Grammar). Jinan: Shandong Edecation Press.[王力. (1985).
hh王力文集(第二卷)中国现代语法ii. 济南: 山东教育出版社.]
he Yuyigongneng(Self-reference and other reference: nominalization markers of DE, ZHE,
SUO, ZHI and their grammatical and semantical functions). Fangyan (Dialect), (1), 16–31. [朱
德熙. (1983). 自指和转指:汉语名词化标记 “的、者、所、之”的语法功能和语义功能.
hh方言ii,(1), 16–31.]
Chapter 12
Conclusions and Expectations
Abstract The objective and systematic description of the hybridity features in

translated Chinese plays an important role in language studies and translation
studies. The hybridity features of translated Chinese are the result of the influence
of the source language and the normalization effect of the target language.
Multilevel hybridity features can demonstrate the nature of translation and reflect
the translation norms which have been adopted by the translators during the
translation processes. This chapter offers a brief summary of the contents and
findings of the research on the one hand, and explores the theoretical and practical
implications on the other hand. The limitations are also presented in the end of the
chapter.
12.1 Introduction
Just as the scientific observation of the symptoms and signs of an illness are an
important means for doctors to make decisions to help their patients, the objective
and systematic descriptions of the translated language features are basic for trans-
lation studies and analysis.
As the patterns of disease symptoms can help us diagnose the illness and disease,
so the features of translated language provide evidence for us to infer the translation
strategies and norms which translators have adopted, consciously or unconsciously.
The hybridity features of translated Chinese are the result of the influence of the
source language and the normalization effect of the target language. The translation
products can suggest authorial and translatorial decisions on the one hand, and the
distinctive features of translationese on the other hand.
The previous research on hybridity features in translated language was not in a
position to offer a scientific and objective description. Multilevel hybridity features
can demonstrate the nature of translation and reflect the translation norms which
have been adopted by the translators during the translation processes.
The present research selects certain key features of hybridity in translated
Chinese for detailed analysis; drawing evidence from different corpora including
synchronic and diachronic corpora, parallel and comparable corpora, general and

DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-0742-2_12
194 12 Conclusions and Expectations
specific corpora. The next section offers a brief summary of the findings of the
research.
12.2 Summary and the Findings of the Research
The goal of the present research was to give a detailed description of hybridity
characteristics of translated Chinese across different linguistic levels: lexical,
syntactic and discursive.
Any translated work is a composite, hybrid configuration, and translated Chinese
is a complex kind of text, with a mixture of influences from the source language and
target language, and as such it demonstrates hybridity features. Many other factors
leading to the occurrence of hybridity features in translated languages are also
introduced in the research.
Previous research frameworks for investigating translated language were
presented, along with their advantages and disadvantages. The research literature
suggested a range of linguistic features to test against the corpus data. The present
research adopted a corpus analysis framework to explore a number of the hybridity
features of translated Chinese. It is divided into four parts with different focuses for
each part.
In order to differentiate the translated Chinese from non-translated Chinese, the
research also offers a short account of the linguistic norms of non-translated
Chinese, such as non-inflectional language, alleged monosyllabism with disyllable
prevalence, paratactic organization strategy, etc. All these norms are challenged to
a greater or lesser degree in the translated Chinese.
The hybridity features investigated in the research are related to each other. They
are:
(i) Affixation, suffixes, functional words and ‘DV constructions’ for investigating
the morphological inflectional increase, and lexical hybrid features of trans-
lated Chinese.
(ii) Classifiers and classifier constructions, light verbs and light verb construc-
tions, nominalization markers, etc. for analyzing the nominalization tendency
(iii) ‘SHI’, ‘SHI YI GE’ and ‘SHI. . .DE’ structures, cohesive devices in translated
Chinese offer tools for the exploration of hybridity features in translated
Chinese, at the levels of syntax and discourse.
The suffixes discussed in Chaps. 7 and 11 show that the range and frequency of
morphological inflections increase in translated Chinese. As a non-inflectional
language, Chinese has exhibited a fundamental change in the process of language
development and language contact, with the influence of translation arguably
playing a major role. Some experts are explicit in regarding translation as “an
important venue of influence in language contact” (Steiner 2008, p. 320) and
arguing that translation-induced language variation and changes find their traces
12.2 Summary and the Findings of the Research 195
in the translated texts—the translation products. Even so, the distinctive linguistic
nature of “translatorese” “is less obvious, the resulting varieties are superficially
close to native ones, and it applies intralingually, across registers, as much as it does
interlingually” (Hansen-Schirra et al. 2012, p. 3). This being the case, a corpus-
based comparison of the features of translated and non-translated texts is the only
reliable means so far of making the distinctive nature of “translatorese” visible.
The high frequency of DV constructions in translated Chinese offers a good
example of a hybridity feature in translated language. DV constructions had been
used in classical Chinese with a low frequency. They were never subsequently
prevalent in the long history of Chinese language development until the May Fourth
Movement in 1919. From this point on, Anglicised translation became the most
popular medium for translators, and Anglicisation exerted an influence upon the
native Chinese. The DV construction was revived from classical Chinese, and it
became prevalent in translated and non-translated texts as the influence of English
intensified. The DV constructions in modern written Chinese can be divided into
four types, ie, N + de + V, N + V, PP + de + V, V + V, and all these constructions can
trace their current popularity to being ways of rendering English source texts into
Chinese. All these constructions exemplify translation-induced language change in
the language development process.
The classifier constructions also illustrate the hybridity of translated Chinese. As
a classifier language, Chinese uses classifiers commonly and obligatorily. It is not
strange that the non-translated Chinese uses more classifiers than Chinese translated
from English, which belongs to the non-classifier languages. The source language
influences the translation results, in this case with fewer classifiers in translated
Chinese. However, the classifier constructions of ‘YI + Classifier’, such as ‘YI GE’,
are used much more frequently in translated Chinese than in non-translated Chi-
nese. The parallel corpus concordancing results tell us that the English source
language’s common use of articles exerts an influence on translated Chinese, for
the English articles can be considered equivalent to Chinese ‘YI GE’ constructions.
The analyses also tell us that the ‘YI GE’ construction in translated Chinese is a
hybridity feature in that it patterns differently from the way it does in non-translated
Chinese. In translated Chinese, ‘YI GE’ assigns the noun component after the its
position in the sentence, not the numeral meaning as in non-translated Chinese. So,
the outcome of the process of hybridisation in this case is the transformation of the
classifier into a noun-marker.
The prevalence of light verbs in translated Chinese tells us more about variation
from the native Chinese. As pointed out above (see Chap. 9), in many of the
Chinese texts, the light verb can be omitted without changing the sentence’s
meaning. The prevalence of the light verb ‘jı̀nxı́ng’ in translated Chinese
nominalizes the construction and changes the event into an abstract action. Many
researchers regard Chinese as a “verby” language (Liu 2010), while English is a
“nouny” language. The English-Chinese translations introduced more and more
English nouns and noun phrases into translated Chinese. Over time, the frequently-
used light verb constructions in translated Chinese introduced a new
lexicogrammatical option to non-translated Chinese. The light verb can function
as a new type of ‘ba’(把) construction in Chinese, and light verbs can be used as the
main verbs in sentences with a nominalized verb as the object of the light verb
(Xiang 1993). These different factors lead to a single outcome which is that
translated Chinese, like English, is noun-rich.
A further feature of hybridity in translated Chinese is the ‘SHI’ structure which
was investigated in detail in Chap. 10. The ‘SHI’ structure is used more frequently
in translated Chinese than in non-translated Chinese on account of the influence of
English source language. Chapter 10 discussed the use of the ‘SHI + YI GE’
construction in translated Chinese. The construction can function as a generic
judgment by which the predicate expresses generic characteristics of the subject.
With more ‘SHI + YI GE’ constructions used in ‘NP1 + SHI + NP2’ sentences, the
‘YI GE’ began to function as a noun marker in Chinese. The ‘SHI. . .DE’ structure is
used commonly in translated Chinese and it indicates nominalized structures in
Chinese. Further study also suggests that ‘SHI’ can be used as a focus marker in
these ‘SHI. . .DE’ structures, and Chinese ‘SHI’ is one of example of development
of ‘copula > focus marker’.
The nominalization marker ‘zhe’ (者) is used more commonly in translated
Chinese, for most of the English equivalents of ‘zhe’ (者) are the nouns derived
from action verbs or adjectives which are frequently used words in English, and this
can be regarded as the influence of language contact and in particular, translation.
Also the cohesive features in translated Chinese are higher frequency than
non-translated Chinese, and it suggests the impact of translation on the discursive
character of modern Chinese.
12.3 Theoretical and Practical Implications
The present research offers a detailed exploration into the hybridity features of
translated Chinese, and it provides a tentative framework for investigating the
translated texts which have been regarded as a second-hand and distorted version
of real texts, “not worthy of serious academic enquiry” (Baker 1993, p. 233).
In the long history of translation studies, translated texts have been treated with
suspicion, even in the era of corpus linguistics. As Teubert (1996) points out:
Translations, however good and near-perfect they may be (but rarely are), cannot but give a
distorted picture of the language they represent. Linguists should never rely on translations
when they are describing a language. That is why translations have no place in reference
corpora. Rather than representing the language they are written in, they give a mirror image
of their source language (Teubert 1996, p. 247).
From an alternative perspective, the important status of translated language

attracts the researchers’ attention: “. . .translated language constitutes a natural
and important part of any language” (Mauranen 1999, p. 181) and it has been
used as a source material for contrastive studies for a long time.
12.4 Limitations 197
Johansson (2007) regards translation as a source of perceived similarities across

languages, arguing that “most linguists working in the field have either explicitly or
implicitly made use of translation as a means of establishing cross-linguistic
relationships” (Johansson 2007) and James (1980/2005) argues that translation is
the best basis of comparison for contrastive linguists, because “translation equiv-
alence, of this rather rigorously defined sort [. . .], is the best available TC [tertium
comparationis] for CA [contrastive analysis]” (James 1980/2005, p. 178).
A corpus approach “provides a means of handling large amounts of language and
keeping track of many contextual factors at the same time” (Reppen et al. 2002,
p. VIII), so corpus-based translation studies can offer exploring tools for the
investigation of translation properties with empirical data. When we know
“which characteristic features translations systematically – ie in terms of statisti-
cally significant frequency effects – have and how these can be explained, we can
potentially predict under which circumstances a (translated) text will display these
features, in which combinations and to which degree” (Neumann 2012, p. 284).
The present research has combined the advantages of CL and CTS and set up a
corpus analysis framework for investigating the hybridity features in translated
Chinese. All the data obtained from monolingual Chinese comparable corpora
(both diachronic and synchronic ones are included), English-Chinese parallel
corpora, specific and general corpora can help us understand the translated Chinese
and can also sensitize us to the complex norms adopted by the translators during the
translation processes. The linguistic items investigated in the research can offer
some new light on contrastive studies of English and Chinese, and comparative
studies of non-translated and translated Chinese.
The objective and systematic descriptions of the hybridity features of translated
Chinese can also shed light on the study of translated languages. With new and
more descriptive studies of the translated languages, CTS will play a fundamental
role in future translation studies.
12.4 Limitations
The present research focuses on the features of hybridity in translated Chinese

within a corpus analysis framework. Though it can explore the linguistic items in
detail at multilevel, it still faces limitations for the following reasons.
First, ‘hybrid features of translated text’ is a very heterogeneous concept as far as
explanatory sources are concerned. The major sources include the languages
involved (source and target languages, for example), the register of texts, work
projects (translation tasks, time pressure, tools, and resources), cognition, and
socio-culture, etc. These sources pose great challenge to investigating the features
using a uniform methodology (Neumann 2012, p. 284), and all these factors can not
be reflected from the corpus data completely.
Second, the specific lexical items or sentence structures may change a lot within
different time periods. The synchronic corpus and even the diachronic corpus
collected for the research can not solve the problems of the annotations for the
Corpus of
Non-translated Finnish
(CNF)
Comparison 1 Comparison 2
Multi-source-language Mono-source-language
Corpus of Corpus of
Translated Finnish Comparison 3 Translated Finnish
(MuCTF) (MoCTF)
Fig. 12.1 Three-phase comparative analysis (TPCA) of Jantunen (2004)
hybrid features in translated language, especially the annotations of semantic,

syntactic and pragmatic aspects which consist of the important changes of language
over time.
The corpus data can not fully explain the reason why the hybrid features emerge
in translated texts, and why the features change over time. We need more evidence
from other sources. For these reasons, the corpus-based approach to hybrid features
of translated language should be combined with experimental research methods.
The source language included in the present research is just English. In fact,
Chinese that is translated from English may be different from or similar to Chinese
translated from other languages, such as French, German, Japanese, Russian or
other languages. As we have seen, the expressions “Anglicisation” and
“Europeanization” of Chinese have often been used synonymously, but it could
be that some of the effects we have argued for with respect to the influence of
translation from English are more broadly the result of translations from Romance
and/or Germanic languages. If this is so, then the impacts we have identified must
be taken as an index of the pressure for linguistic change, as prompted by transla-
tion from a broader set of languages.
Indeed, in trying to understand the nature of hybridity phenomena in translation,
it helps if any account can be articulated from multiple perspectives. A sort of
‘triangulation’ – or ‘multiangulation’ – helps provide a broader picture of the
phenomena in question (Packard 1997, p. xi). Jantunen (2004) applies a “Three-
Phase Comparative Analysis” (TPCA) to analyse the influence of the source
language. The TPCA and certain related statistical procedures offer some support
for the argument that translated texts retain a dependence on the source language.
Figure 12.1 illustrates the TPCA of Jantunen (2004).
12.5 Expectations
Corpus translation studies have developed rapidly and produced considerable

research which make it a coherent, composite and rich paradigm for translation
studies. The corpus approach to the hybrid features of translated Chinese language
References 199
also sheds new light on the evolution of the Chinese language. The corpus analysis
framework in the present research offers some tentative methods for investigating
the language change, and all the findings in this field will be tested by more and new
data in future.
The linguistic features investigated in the present research shed new light on the
Chinese language development and help researchers understand translation varia-
tions from non-translated Chinese.
Translated language deserves further attention from researchers, not only in
translation studies and corpus linguistics, but also those working in sociolinguistics
and neurolinguistics. The combination of corpus-based and corpus-driven
approaches can help the researchers understand translation phenomena more deeply
(cf. Alves 2003; Alves and Gonçalves 2013; Alves et al. 2014, 2010; Alves and
Vale 2011).
References
Alves, F. (ed.). 2003. Triangulating translation: Perspectives in process oriented research.

Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Alves, F., and J.L. Gonçalves. 2013. Investigating the conceptual-procedural distinction in the
translation process: A relevance-theoretic analysis of micro and macro translation units. Target
25(1): 107–124.
Alves, F., and D.C. Vale. 2011. On drafting and revision in translation: A corpus linguistics
oriented analysis of translation process data. Translation: Corpora, Computation Cognition 1
(1): 105–122.
Alves, F., A. Pagano, S. Neumann, E. Steiner, and S. Hansen-Schirra. 2010. Translation units and
grammatical shifts: Towards an integration of product- and process-based translation research.
In Translation and cognition, ed. G.M. Shreve and E. Angelone, 109–142. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Alves, F., A. Pagano, and I. da Silva. 2014. Effortful text production in translation: A study of
grammatical (de)metaphorization drawing on product and process data. Translation and
Interpreting Studies 9(1): 25–51.
Baker, M. 1993. Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Implications and applications. In Text
and technology: In honour of John Sinclair, ed. M. Baker, G. Francis, and E. Tognini-Bonelli,
James, C. 1980/2005. Contrastive Analysis. 青岛: 青岛出版社.
Jantunen, J.H. 2004. Untypical patterns in translations: Issues on corpus methodology and
synonymity. In Translation universals: Do they exist? ed. A. Mauranen and P. Kujamäki,
101–126. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Johansson, S. 2007. Seeing through multilingual corpora: On the use of corpora in contrastive
studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
语教学ii, 24(1), 3–17.]
Mauranen, A. 1999. Will ‘translationese’ ruin a contrastive study? Languages in Contrast 2(2):
161–185.
Neumann, S. 2012. Conclusions and outlook: An empirical perspective on translation studies. In
Cross-linguistic corpora for the study of translation: Insights from the language pair English-
German, ed. S. Hansen-Schirra, S. Neumann, and E. Steiner, 283–287. Berlin: Walter de
Gruyter GmbH.
Packard, J.L., ed. 1997. New approaches to Chinese word formation: Morphology, phonology, and
the Lexicon in modern and ancient Chinese. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Reppen, R., S.M. Fitzmaurice, and D. Biber (eds.). 2002. Using corpora to explore linguistic
variation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Steiner, E. 2008. Empirical studies of translations as a mode of language contact: “Explicitness” of
lexicogrammatical encoding as a relevant dimension. In Language contact and contact lan-
guages, ed. P. Siemund and N. Kintana, 317–346. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Teubert, W. 1996. Comparable or parallel corpora? International Journal of Lexicography 9(3):
238–264.
Xiang, X. 1993. Jianming Hanyushi Xia (A history of Chinese language, Vol. II). Beijing: Gaodeng
Jiaoyu Chubanshe. [向熹. (1993). hh简明汉语史(下)ii. 北京: 高等教育出版社.]
Appendices
Appendix 1: Books Sampled for MCCC
MCCC (TC vs. NTC)
1. TC: (I) 1930s–1960s: 7 books

(II) 1970s–2000s: 48 books
2. NTC: (I) 1930s–1960s: 12 books
(II) 1970s–2000s: 32 books
1. TC
English version(Authors/ Chinese version Published

titles/year) translator(s) Publishers time
William Smart¼An Intro- Deng Zongru ujú 黎明书局
Lı́mı́ng sh 1931
duction to the Theory of He Xueni
Value (1910)
Richard Henry Tawney ¼ Wu Zhichun Shāngw uguǎn 商务
uYı̀nsh 1933
The Acquisitive Society 印书馆
(1920)
John Dewey¼Changes of Xu Chongqing Shāngw uguǎn 商务
uYı̀nsh 1958
Philosophy (1919) 印书馆
AlfredWhitehead¼Science He Qin Shāngw uguǎn 商务
uYı̀nsh 1959
and the Modern World 印书馆
(1926)
Henry Maine¼Ancient Shen Jingyi Shāngw uguǎn 商务
uYı̀nsh 1959
Law (1908) 印书馆
Bertrand Russell¼A His- He Zhaowu, Li Yuese Shāngw uguǎn 商务
uYı̀nsh 1963
tory of Western Philosophy 印书馆
(1945)
(continued)

DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-0742-2
202 Appendices

Alfred Marshall¼ Zhu Zhitai Shāngw uguǎn 商务
uYı̀nsh 1964
Principles of Economics 印书馆
(1920)
Edgar Snow¼The Long Zhao Jiabi ShanghǎiRénmı́nChu 1975
Revolution (1971) bǎnshè
上海人民出版社
Wiener, Norbert¼Some of Chen Bu Shāngw uguǎn 商务
uYı̀nsh 1978
the useful people (1950) 印书馆
Richard Dawkins¼The Lu Yunzhong, Zhang Kēxué Chubǎnshè 1981
Selfish Gene (1976) Daiyun 科学出版社
Milton Friedman & Rose Hu Qi, et al. Shāngw uguǎn 商务
uYı̀nsh 1982
Friedman¼Free to Choose: 印书馆
A Personal Statement
(1980)
John Desmond Chen Tifang Shāngw uguǎn 商务
uYı̀nsh 1982
Bernal¼The Social Func- 印书馆
tion of Science (1944)
Winston Churchill¼A His- Xue Limin, Lin Lin Xı̄nhuá Ch
ubǎnshè 1985
tory of the English- 新华出版社
Speaking Peoples (1956)
E.O.Wilson¼On Human Lin Hesheng Guı̀zhōuRénmı́nChu 1987
Nature (1979) bǎnshè 贵州人民出版社
Eric Fromm¼Escape from Chen Mingxue BěifāngWényı̀ Ch
u bǎnshè 1987
Freedom (1941) 北方文艺出版社
Margaret Mead¼Culture Zhou Xiaohong, Zhou HéběiRénmı́nChubǎnshè 1987
and commitment (1970) Yi 河北人民出版社
Ludwig Huang Zhengdong, Qı̄nghuáDaxuéChubǎnshè 1987
Wittgenstein¼Culture and Tang Shaojie 清华大学出版社
Value (1984)
Daniel Bell¼The cultural Zhao Yifan, et al. udian 三联书店
SānliánSh 1989
contradictions of capital-
ism (1978)
Kenneth W. Clarkson & Yang Long, Luojing udian 三联书店
SānliánSh 1989
R. L. Miller¼Industrial
Organization: Theory, Evi-
dence and Public Policy
(1981)
Ralph Linton¼The Tree of He Daokuan Chongqı̀ngCh ubǎnshè 重 1989
Culture (1955) 庆出版社
James Ping Xinqiao, Mo udian 三联书店
SānliánSh 1989
M. Buchanan¼Liberty, Fumin
Market,and State (1986)
Joseph Alois He Wei et al. Shāngw uguǎn 商务
uYı̀nsh 1990
Schumpeter¼The Theory 印书馆
of Economic Development
(1934)
(continued)
Appendices 203

Mark Blaug¼The Method- Li Mingxing et al. Běijı̄ngDaxuéCh
ubǎnshè 1990
ology of Economics: Or, 北京大学出版社
How Economists Explain
(1980)
Barber,B.¼Science and the Gu Xin et al. udian 三联书店
SānliánSh 1991
social order (1970)
John Rawls¼A Theory of Xie Tingguang ShanghǎiYiwénChubǎnshè 1991
Justice (1971) 上海译文出版社
Coadse,R.,Alchain,A.& Liu Shouying et al. udian 三联书店
SānliánSh 1994
North,D.¼Property rights
and institutional changes
(1960)
Joseph F.Rychlak¼ Xu Zemin, Luo ubǎnshè
Guı̀zhōuRénmı́nCh 1994
Discovering free will and Xuanmin 贵州人民出版社
personal responsibility
(1979)
Isaiah Berlin¼Two Con- Chen Xiaolin udian 三联书店
SānliánSh 1995
cepts of Liberty (1958)
Stephen Hawking¼A Brief Hu Xiaoming, Wu HúnánKēxuéJı̀sh
uCh
ubǎn- 1995
History of Time: a Readers Zhongchao shè 湖南科学技术出版社
Companion (1992)
Rachel Carson¼Silent Lv Ruilan, Li Jı́lı́nRénmı́nCh ubǎnshè 吉 1997
Spring (1962) Changsheng 林人民出版社
Richard Posner¼Economic Jiang Zhaokang Zhōnggu oDabǎikēQuánsh- 1997
Analysis of Law (1992) uCh ubǎnshè 中国大百科
全书出版社
Friedrich A. Hayek¼The Deng Zhenglai SānliánSh udian 三联书店 1997
Constitution of Liberty
(1978)
Robin George He Zhaowu, Zhang Shāngw uguǎn 商务
uYı̀nsh 1997
Collingwood¼The Idea of Wenjie 印书馆
History (1946)
Samuel P·Huntington¼The Zhou Qi et al. ubǎnshè 新华出
Xı̄nhuá Ch 1998
Clash of Civilizations and 版社
the Remaking of World
Order (1996)
I. B. Cohen¼Revolution in Lu Xudong et al. ShāngwuYı̀nshuguǎn 商务 1998
Science (1985) 印书馆
L.S.Stavrianos¼A Global Wu Xiangying, Liang ShanghǎiShèhuı̀Kēxuéyu- 1999
History:From Prehistory to Chi. anChubǎnshè 上海社会科
the 21st Century (1982) 学院出版社
Mancur Lloyd Olson, Jr¼ Lv Yingzhong et al. ShāngwuYı̀nshuguǎn 商务 1999
The Rise and Decline of 印书馆
Nations (1982)
Hannah Arendt¼The Zhu Qianwei ShanghǎiRénmı́nCh
ubǎns- 1999
Human Condition (1958) hè 上海人民出版社
(continued)
204 Appendices

Richard S. Howey¼The Yan Zhijie Zhōnggu oShèhuı̀KēxuéC- 1999
Rise of the Marginal Utility hubǎnshè 中国社会科学
School (1960) 出版社
Karl Popper¼The Open Li Zhengben Zhōnggu oMěish uxuéyuan- 1999
Universe: An Argument for Chubǎnshè 中国美术学院
Indeterminism (1988) 出版社
Francis Crick¼THE Wang Yunjiu et al. HúnánKēxuéJı̀sh
uCh ubǎn- 1999
Astonishing Hypothesis: shè 湖南科学技术出版社
The Scientific Search for
the Soul (1994)
Norman P.Barry¼On Zhu Qianwei ShanghǎiRénmı́nCh
ubǎns- 1999
Classical Liberalism and hè 上海人民出版社
Libertarianism (1986)
Eric Hobsbawm¼The Age Wang Zhanghui Jiāngs
uRénmı́nCh
ubǎnshè 1999
of Revolution:1789–1848 江苏人民出版社
(1962)
Bronislaw Malinowski¼A Huang Jianbo et al. ZhōngyāngMı́nzúDaxuéC- 1999
Scientific Theory of Cul- hubǎnshè 中央民族大学
ture and other essays 出版社
(1969)
Allen G.Debus¼Man and Zhou Yanling. ubǎnshè 复
FudanDaxuéCh 2000
Nature in the Renaissance 旦大学出版社
(1978)
Dennis Chen Demin et al. ZhongguoShehuiKēxuéC- 2000
K. Mumby¼Communicati- hubǎnshè 中国社会科学
on and Power in Organiza- 出版社
tion: Discourse, Ideology,
and Domination (1988)
Karl Popper¼Unended Qiu Renzong Jiāngs
uRénmı́nCh
ubǎnshè 2000
Quest: An intellectual 江苏人民出版社
autobiography (1992)
Anthony Giddens¼The Zheng Ge et al. Běijı̄ngDaxuéCh
ubǎnshè 2000
Third Way: The Renewal 北京大学出版社
of Social Democracy
(1998)
Amold J. Xu Bo et al ubǎns-
ShanghǎiRénmı́nCh 2001
Toynbee¼Mankind and hè 上海人民出版社
Mother Earth (1976)
Morton Hunt¼The Story of Li Si, Wang Yuerui ubǎnshè 海南出
HǎinánCh 2002
Psychology (1994) 版社
Desmond Morris¼The Liu Wen rong Wénhuı̀Chubǎnshè 文汇出 2002
Naked Ape: A Zoologist’s 版社
Study of the Human Ani-
mal (1967)
T. S. Kuhn¼The Structure Jin Wulun, Hu Xinhe Běijı̄ngDaxuéCh
ubǎnshè 2003
of Scientific Revolutions 北京大学出版社
(1996)
(continued)
Appendices 205

Imre Lakatos¼The Meth- Lan Zheng ShanghǎiYiwénCh
ubǎnshè 2005
odology of Scientific 上海译文出版社
Research Programmes
(1978)
Russell Jacoby¼The Last Hong Jie JiāngsuRénmı́nCh ubǎnshè 2006
Intellectuals (1987) 江苏人民出版社
Richard Dawkins¼River Wang Zhihua, Yue ShanghǎiKēxuéJı̀sh
uCh ub- 2008
Out of Eden (1996) Renfeng ǎnshè 上海科学技术出版
社
2. NTC
NON-TC-ACADEMIC 1930s–1960s:
Book title Author(s) Year Press

ZhōngguoLı̀daiZhèngZhı̀DéShı̄ QIANMU 1955 udian 三联
SānliánSh
书店
WEIZHONGGUOWENHUAJING MOUZONGSAN 1958 Mı́nzhǔPı́nglunZázhı̀
GAOSHIJIERENSHISHU ET AL
ZHONGGUOSIXIANGTONGSHI HOUWAILU 1963 Rénmı́nCh ubǎnshè
HUSHANGXIANSILU QIANMU 1948 udian 三联
SānliánSh
书店
GUOSHIXINLUN QIANMU 1950 udian 三联
SānliánSh
书店
ZHONGGUOLISHIYANJIUFA QIANMU 1969 udian 三联
SānliánSh
书店
ZHONGGUOSIXIANGTONGSUJI QIANMU 1955 udian 三联
SānliánSh
ANGHUA 书店
NON-TC-ACADEMIC 1990s–2000s:

YISHU XIANXIANG DE HE XIN 1987 RENMIN WENXUE
FUHAO WENHUAXUE CHUBANSHE
CHANSHI
YUWEN CHANGTAN LV SHUXIANG 1988 BEIJINGDAXUE
CHUBANSHE
MENGHUAN YU XIANSHI TAO DONGFENG 1993 HAINAN CHUBANSHE
GUZHUN WENJI GU ZHUN 1994 GUIZHOU RENMIN
CHUBANSHE
GUOSHI DAGANG QIAN MU 1994 SHANGWU
(XIUDINGBEN) YINSHUGUAN
ZHONGGUO WENXUESHI ZHANG PEIHENG, 1996 FUDAN DAXUE
LUO YUMING CHUBANSHE
ZHONGGUO DANGDAI ZHOU XIAN 1997 BEIJING DAXUE
SHENMEI WENHUA YANJIU CHUBANSHE
(continued)
206 Appendices

YUYANXUE GANGYAO YE FEISHENG,XU 1997 BEIJING DAXUE
TONGQIANG CHUBANSHE
ZHONGGUO XIANDAI QIAN LIQUN 1998 BEIJING DAXUE
WENXUE SANSHINIAN DENG CHUBANSHE
JUJUE YIWANG QIAN LIQUN 1999 SHANTOU DAXUE
CHUBANSHE
KANGDE”CHUNCUI LIXING YANG ZUTAO, 2001 RENMIN CHUBANSHE
PIPAN”ZHIYAO DENG
XIAOMANG
XIN PIPAN ZHUYI DENG 2001 SHISHI CHUBANSHE
XIAOMANG
SIKAO:XINGUOJIAZHUYI DE HE XIN 2001 SHISHI CHUBANSHE
JINGJIGUAN
SIKAO: WODEZHEXUE YU HE XIN 2001 SHISHI CHUBANSHE
ZONGJIAOGUAN
ZHONGGUO FOJIAOZHEXUE FANG LITIAN 2002 ZHONGGUO RENMIN
YAOYI DAXUE CHUBANSHE
LISHI XUEXI JINGYAO LIU PENG,ZHU 2003 BEIJING GUANGBO
HANGUO XUEYUAN
CHUBANSHE
QIGONG ZAYI BAO WENQING 2004 ZHONGGUO QINGNIAN
CHUBANSHE
ZHONGGUO DE PINGE LOU YULIE 2007 DANGDAI ZHONGGUO
CHUBANSHE
GUXILA LUOMA ZHEXUE DENG 2008 SHIJIE TUSHU CHUBAN
JIANGYANLU XIAOMANG GONGSI
WO DE JINGSHEN ZIZHUAN QIAN LIQUN 2007 GUANGXI SHIFAN
DAXUE CHUBANSHE
ZHEXUESHI FANGFALUN DENG 2008 CHONGQING DAXUE
SHISIJIANG XIAOMANG CHUBANSHE
LUN BEIDA QIAN LIQUN 2008 GUANGXI SHIFAN
DAXUE CHUBANSHE
ZHEXUE KEXUE CHANGSHI CHEN JIAYING 2008 GUOJI WENHUA
CHUBAN GONGSI
JINRONG DE LUOJI CHEN ZHIWU 2009 GUOJI WENHUA
CHUBAN GONGSI
CONG CAIYUANPEI DAO YUE NAN 2010 ZHONGHUA SHUJU
HUSHI
HEFANG SHI SHUSHENG PAN GUANGZHE 2010 GUANGXI SHIFAN
DAXUE CHUBANSHE
RUJIA LUNLI XINPIPAN DENG 2010 CHONGQING DAXUE
XIAOMANG CHUBANSHE
ZHENGFU DE BENFEN QIU FENG 2010 JIANGSU WENYI
CHUBANSHE
MEIYOU ZHONGUO MOSHI CHEN ZHIWU 2010 BAQI WENHUA
ZHEHUISHI CHUBANSHE
(continued)
Appendices 207

CHENYINGE YU FUSINIAN YUE NAN 2010 SHANXI SHIFAN
(QUAN XINBAN) DAXUE CHUBANSHE
YUEDU GAIBIAN RENSHENG BA DAN 2010 DONGFANG
CHUBANSHE
XINGSHUAI DAGUO JIAN XING GUOJUN 2010 JIXIE GONGYE
CHUBANSHE
Appendix 2: CLAWS 8 Tagset for English
C8 tagset (c) Lancaster University 1995–2004
CLAWS TAGSET C8
Last changed – N.I.S. 14 Jan 2001
Tag Description
APPGE possessive pronoun, pre-nominal (e.g. “my”, “your”, “our”)
AT article (e.g. “the”, “no”)
AT1 singular article (e.g. “a”, “an”, “every”)
BCL before-clause marker (e.g. “in order (that)”, “in order (to)”)
CC coordinating conjunction (e.g. “and”, “or”)
CCB adversative coordinating conjunction (“but”)
CS subordinating conjunction (e.g. “if”, “because”, “unless”, “so”, “for”)
CSA “as” (as conjunction)
CSN “than” (as conjunction)
CST “that” (as conjunction). Note that this tag in C7 subsumed both “that” as a comple-
mentizer and “that” as a relativizer
CSW “whether” (as conjunction)
DA after-determiner or post-determiner capable of pronominal function (e.g. “such”,
“former”, “same”)
DA1 singular after-determiner (e.g. “little”, “much”)
DA2 plural after-determiner (e.g. “few”, “several”, “many”)
DAR comparative after-determiner (e.g. “more”, “less”, “fewer”)
DAT superlative after-determiner (e.g. “most”, “least”, “fewest”)
DB before determiner or pre-determiner capable of pronominal function (“all”, “half”)
DB2 plural before-determiner (“both”)
DD determiner (capable of pronominal function) (e.g “any”, “some”)
DD1 singular determiner (e.g. “this”, “that”, “another”)
DD2 plural determiner (“these”, “those”)
DDL wh-determiner, functioning as relative pronoun (“which”)
DDLGE wh-determiner, functioning as relative pronoun, genitive (“whose”)
DDQ wh-determiner, interrogative (“which”, “what”). Note that this tag in C7 subsumed
both interrog and relativizing uses
(continued)
208 Appendices
DDQGE wh-determiner, interrogative, genitive (“whose”). Note that this tag in C7 subsumed
DDQV wh-ever determiner, interrogative (“whichever”, “whatever”)
EX existential “there”
FO formula
FU unclassified word
FW foreign word
GE germanic genitive marker - (“’” or “’s”)
IF “for” (as preposition)
II general preposition
IO “of” (as preposition)
IW “with”, “without” (as prepositions)
JJ general adjective
JJR general comparative adjective (e.g. “older”, “better”, “stronger”)
JJT general superlative adjective (e.g. “oldest”, “best”, “strongest”)
JK catenative adjective (“able”, as in “be able to”)
MC cardinal number, neutral for number (“two”, “three”..)
MC1 singular cardinal number (“one”)
MC2 plural cardinal number (e.g. “sixes”, “sevens”)
MCGE genitive cardinal number, neutral for number (“two’s”, “100’s”)
MCMC hyphenated number (“40–50”, “1770–1827”)
MD ordinal number (e.g. “first”, “second”, “next”, “last”)
MF fraction, neutral for number (e.g. “quarters”, “two-thirds”)
ND1 singular noun of direction (e.g. “north”, “southeast”)
NN common noun, neutral for number (e.g. “sheep”, “cod”, “headquarters”)
NN1 singular common noun (e.g. “book”, “girl”)
NN2 plural common noun (e.g. “books”, “girls”)
NNA following noun of title (e.g. “M.A.”)
NNB preceding noun of title (e.g. “Mr.”, “Prof.”)
NNL1 singular locative noun, in naming expression (e.g. “Island”, as in “Coney Island”,
“Street” in “Argyle Street”)
NNL2 plural locative noun (e.g.”Islands”, as in “Virgin Islands”)
NNO numeral noun, neutral for number (e.g. “dozen”, “hundred”)
NNO2 numeral noun, plural (e.g. “hundreds”, “thousands”)
NNT1 temporal noun, singular (e.g. “day”, “week”, “year”)
NNT2 temporal noun, plural (e.g. “days”, “weeks”, “years”)
NNU unit of measurement, neutral for number (e.g. “in”, “cc”)
NNU1 singular unit of measurement (e.g. “inch”, “centimetre”)
NNU2 plural unit of measurement (e.g. “ins.”, “feet”)
NP proper noun, neutral for number (e.g. “IBM”, “Andes”)
NP1 singular proper noun (e.g. “London”, “Jane”, “Frederick”)
NP2 plural proper noun (e.g. “Browns”, “Reagans”, “Koreas”)
NPD1 singular weekday noun (e.g. “Sunday”)
NPD2 plural weekday noun (e.g. “Sundays”)
(continued)
Appendices 209
NPM1 singular month noun (e.g. “October”)

NPM2 plural month noun (e.g. “Octobers”)
PN indefinite pronoun, neutral for number (“none”)
PN1 indefinite pronoun, singular (e.g. “anyone”, “everything”, “nobody”, “one”)
PNLO objective wh-pronoun, relative (“whom”)
PNLS subjective wh-pronoun, relative (“who”)
PNQO objective wh-pronoun, interrogative (“whom”)”). Note that this tag in C7 subsumed
PNQS subjective wh-pronoun, interrogative (“who”). Note that this tag in C7 subsumed
PNQV wh-ever pronoun (“whoever”)
PNX1 reflexive indefinite pronoun (“oneself”)
PPGE nominal possessive personal pronoun (e.g. “mine”, “yours”)
PPH1 3rd person sing. neuter personal pronoun (“it”)
PPHO1 3rd person sing. objective personal pronoun (“him”, “her”)
PPHO2 3rd person plural objective personal pronoun (“them”)
PPHS1 3rd person sing. subjective personal pronoun (“he”, “she”)
PPHS2 3rd person plural subjective personal pronoun (“they”)
PPIO1 1st person sing. objective personal pronoun (“me”)
PPIO2 1st person plural objective personal pronoun (“us”)
PPIS1 1st person sing. subjective personal pronoun (“I”)
PPIS2 1st person plural subjective personal pronoun (“we”)
PPX1 singular reflexive personal pronoun (e.g. “yourself”, “itself”)
PPX2 plural reflexive personal pronoun (e.g. “yourselves”, “themselves”)
PPY 2nd person personal pronoun (“you”)
RA adverb, after nominal head (e.g. “else”, “galore”)
REX adverb introducing appositional constructions (“namely”, “e.g.”)
RG degree adverb (“very”, “so”, “too”)
RGQ wh- degree adverb (“how”)
RGQV wh-ever degree adverb (“however”)
RGR comparative degree adverb (“more”, “less”)
RGT superlative degree adverb (“most”, “least”)
RL locative adverb (e.g. “alongside”, “forward”)
RP prep. adverb, particle (e.g “about”, “in”)
RPK prep. adv., catenative (“about” in “be about to”)
RR general adverb
RRQ wh- general adverb (“where”, “when”, “why”, “how”)
RRQV wh-ever general adverb (“wherever”, “whenever”)
RRR comparative general adverb (e.g. “better”, “longer”)
RRT superlative general adverb (e.g. “best”, “longest”)
RT quasi-nominal adverb of time (e.g. “now”, “tomorrow”)
TO infinitive marker (“to”)
UH interjection (e.g. “oh”, “yes”, “um”)
(continued)
210 Appendices
VAB0 base form of verb “BE” (auxiliary), imperative or subjunctive. Note that for this and
subsequent tags the insertion of an -A- in second position marks auxiliary use
VABDR “were” (auxiliary)
VABDZ “was” (auxiliary)
VABG “being” (auxiliary)
VABI “be” infinitive (auxiliary)
VABM “am” (auxiliary)
VABN “been” (auxiliary)
VABR “are” (auxiliary)
VABZ “is” (auxiliary)
VVB0 base form of “BE” (lexical vb), imperative or subjunctive
VVBDR “were” (lexical)
VVBDZ “was” (lexical)
VVBG “being” (lexical)
VVBI “be” infinitive (lexical)
VVBM “am” (lexical)
VVBN “been” (lexical)
VVBR “are” (lexical)
VVBZ “is” (lexical)
VAD0 base form of verb “DO” (auxiliary), indicative, imperative or subjunctive
VADD “did” (auxiliary)
VADZ “does” (auxiliary)
VVD0 base form of verb “DO” (lexical), indicative, imperative or subjunctive
VVDD “did” (lexical)
VVDG “doing”
VVDI “do” infinitive (lexical)
VVDN “done”
VVDZ “does” (lexical)
VAH0 base form of “HAVE” (auxiliary), indicative, imperative or subjunctive
VAHD “had” (past tense), (auxiliary)
VAHG “having”, (auxiliary)
VAHI “have” infinitive, (auxiliary)
VAHZ “has”, (auxiliary)
VVH0 base form of verb “HAVE” (lexical), indicative, imperative or subjunctive
VVHD “had” (past tense), (lexical)
VVHG “having”, (lexical)
VVHI “have” infinitive, (lexical)
VVHN “had” (past participle)
VVHZ “has”, (lexical)
VM modal auxiliary (“can”, “will”, “would”, etc.)
VMK modal catenative (“ought”, “used”)
VV0 base form of lexical verb (e.g. “give”, “work”) Note: excludes BE, HAVE and DO
(see above, tags beginning VVB-, VVH-, VVD-)
VVD past tense of lexical verb (e.g. “gave”, “worked”)
Appendices 211
Appendix 3: ICTCLAS2008 Part-of-speech Tagset
a adjective
ad adverbial use of adjective
ag adjectival morpheme
al adjectival formulaic expression
an nominal use of adjective
b noun modifier (non-predicate noun modifier)
bg noun modifier morpheme
bl noun modifying formulaic expression
c conjunction
cc coordinating conjunction
d adverb
dg adverbial morpheme
dl adverbial formulaic expression
e interjection
f space word
h prefix
k suffix
m numeral
mg numeral morpheme
mq numeral-classifier
n noun
ng nominal morpheme
nl nominal formulaic expression
nr person name
nr1 Chinese surname
nr2 Chinese given name
nrf transliterated foreign name
nrj Japanese person name
ns place name
nsf transliterated place name
nt organisation name
nz other proper noun
o onomatopoeia
p preposition
pba preposition 把
pbei preposition 被
q classifier
qt temporal classifier
qv verbal classifier
r pronoun
rg pronoun morpheme
rr personal pronoun
212 Appendices
ryinterrogative pronoun
rys place interrogative pronoun
ryt temporal interrogative pronoun
ryv verbal interrogative pronoun
rz deictic pronoun
rzs place pronoun
rzt temporal pronoun
rzv verbal pronoun
s place word
t time word
tg time word morpheme
u auxiliary
ude1 的
ude2 地
ude3 得
udeng 等
udh 的话
uguo 过
ujl 极了
ule 了
ulian emphatic 连
uls 来说、来讲、而言、说来
uqj 起见
usuo 所
uyy 一样、一般、似的、般
uzhe 着
uzhi 之
v verb
vd adverbial use of verb
vf directional verb
vg verbal morpheme
vi intransitive verb
vl verbal formulaic expression
vn nominal use of verb
vshi verb shi
vx pro-verb, light verb
vyou verb you
w punctuation
wb full or half-length percentage mark
wd full or half-length comma
wf full or half-length semi-colon
wh unit symbol
wj full-length stop
wky full or half-length closing bracket or parenthesis
Appendices 213
wkz full or half-length left opening bracket or parenthesis

wm full or half-length colon
wn full-length enumeration mark
wp full or half-length dash
ws full-length ellipsis
wt full or half-length exclamation mark
ww full or half-length question mark
wyb half-length single or double quote
wyz full-length single or double opening quote
wyz full-length single or double closing quote
x character string
xu web address
xx non-word morpheme
y particle
z descriptive
References
English References
Adab, B. 2005. Translating into a second language: Can we, should we? In In and out of English:
For better, for worse? ed. G. Anderman and M. Rogers, 227–241. Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters LTD.
Aitchison, J. 2001. Language change: Progress or decay? 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Allan, K. 1977. Classifier. Language 53(2): 285–311.
Alves, F. (ed.). 2003. Triangulating translation: Perspectives in process oriented research.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Alves, F., and J.L. Gonçalves. 2013. Investigating the conceptual-procedural distinction in the
translation process: A relevance-theoretic analysis of micro and macro translation units. Target
25(1): 107–124.
Alves, F., and D.C. Vale. 2011. On drafting and revision in translation: A corpus linguistics
oriented analysis of translation process data. Translation: Corpora, Computation Cognition 1
(1): 105–122.
Alves, F., A. Pagano, S. Neumann, E. Steiner, and S. Hansen-Schirra. 2010. Translation units and
grammatical shifts: Towards an integration of product- and process-based translation research.
In Translation and cognition, ed. G.M. Shreve and E. Angelone, 109–142. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Alves, F., A. Pagano, and I. da Silva. 2014. Effortful text production in translation: A study of
grammatical (de)metaphorization drawing on product and process data. Translation and
Interpreting Studies 9(1): 25–51.
Anderman, G., and M. Rogers (eds.). 2005. In and out of English: For better, for worse? Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters LTD.
Anderson, W., and J. Corbett. 2009. Exploring English with online corpora. London: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Arcodia, G.F. 2007. Chinese: A language of compound words? In Selected Proceedings of the 5th
Décembrettes: Morphology in Toulouse, ed. F. Montermini, G. Boyé, and N. Hathout, 79–90.
Somerville: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Audi, R. (ed.). 1999. The Cambridge dictionary of philosophy, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Baker, M. 1993. Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Implications and applications. In Text
and technology: In honour of John Sinclair, ed. M. Baker, G. Francis, and E. Tognini-Bonelli,

DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-0742-2
216 References
Baker, M. 1995. Corpora in translation studies: An overview and some suggestions for future
research. Target 7(2): 223–243.
LSP and translation: Studies in language engineering in honour of Juan C. Sager,
Baker, M. 1999. The role of corpora in investigating the linguistic behaviour of professional
translators. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 4(2): 281–298.
Baker, M. 2000. Towards a methodology for investigating the style of a literary translator. Target
12(2): 241–266.
Baker, M. 2004. A corpus-based view of similarity and difference in translation. International
Journal of Corpus Linguistics 9(2): 167–193.
€
Baker, M. 2005. Linguistic models & methods in the study of translation. In Ubersetzung/
translation/traduction: An international encyclopedia of translation studies, ed. H. Kittel,
A.P. Frank, N. Greiner, T. Hermans, W. Koller, J. Lambert, and F. Paul, 285–294. Berlin:
Walter de Gruyter.
Baker, M. 2007. Patterns of idiomaticity in translated vs non-translated text. Belgian Journal of
Linguistics 21: 11–21.
Bakhtin, M.M. 1981. Discourse in novel. In Dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin
(Edited by Michael Holquist; Translated by Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist),
ed. M.M. Bakhtin, 259–422. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Balasko, M. 2008. What does the figure show? Patterns of translationese in a Hungarian compa-
rable corpus. trans-kom 1(1): 58–73.
Baroni, M., and S. Bernardini. 2006. A new approach to the study of translationese: Machine-
learning the difference between original and translated text. Literary and Linguistic Computing
21(3): 259–274.
Bausell, R.B. 1986. A practical guide to conducting empirical research. New York: Harper & Row
Publishers, Inc.
Becher, V. 2010. Abandoning the notion of “translation-inherent” explicitation: Against a dogma
of translation studies. Across Languages and Cultures 11(1): 1–28.
Berman, A. 1985/2000. Translation and the trials of the foreign. In The translation studies reader,
Bhabha, H.K. 1994. The location of culture. London/New York: Routledge.
Biber, D., S. Johansson, G. Leech, S. Conrad, and E. Finegan (eds.). 1999. Longman grammar of
spoken and written English. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Black, T.R. 1999. Doing quantitative research in the social sciences: An integrated approach to
research design, measurement and statistics. London: Sage Publications.
Blackburn, S. (ed.). 1996. Oxford dictionary of philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Blum-Kulka, S. 1986/2000. Shifts of cohesion and coherence in translation. In The translation
studies reader, ed. L. Venuti, 298–313. London/New York: Routledge.
Bond, N. 2001. Interpreting the objectively “strange” and the strangely “objective”. Across
Languages and Cultures 2(2): 251–259.
Bowker, L., and J. Pearson. 2002. Working with specialized language: A practical guide to using
corpora. London/New York: Routledge.
Brown, P.F., Lai, J.C., and R.L. Mercer. 1991. Aligning sentences in parallel corpora. Proceedings
of the 29th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 169–176.
Berkeley: ACL.
Brugman, C. 2001. Light verbs and polysemy. Language Sciences 23: 551–578.
Bussmann, H. 1998. Routledge dictionary of language and linguistics. Trans. and ed. Gregory
Trauth and Kerstin Kazzazi. London/New York: Routledge.
Butt, M., and W. Geuder. 2001. On the (semi)lexical status of light verbs. In Semi-lexical
categories: The function of content words and the content of function words, ed. N. Corver
and Hv Riemsdijk, 323–370. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
References 217
Chan, L.T. 2004. Twentieth-century Chinese translation theory: Modes, issues and debates.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Chan, L.T. 2010. Readers, reading and reception of translated fiction in Chinese: Novel encoun-
ters. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing Ltd.
Chan, C.H. 2011. The Europeanization of modern written Chinese: A case study of the changing
third person pronouns in the twentieth century and beyond. Berlin: Peter Lang AG.
California Press.
Chen, P. 1999. Modern Chinese: History and sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Chen, J.W. 2006. Explicitation through the use of connectives in translated Chinese: A corpus-
based study. Doctoral thesis. University of Manchester, Manchester.
Cheng, W., and P.W.Y. Lam. 2012. Western perceptions of Hong Kong ten years on: A corpus-
driven critical discourse study. Applied Linguistics 34(2): 173–190.
Chesterman, A. 2004a. Beyond the particular. In Translation universals: Do they exist?
ed. A. Mauranen and P. Kujamäki, 33–49. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publish-
ing Company.
Chesterman, A. 2004b. Contrastive textlinguistics and translation universals. In Contrastive
analysis in language: Identifying linguistic units of comparison, ed. D. Willems,
B. Defrancq, T. Colleman, and D. Noël, 213–229. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Cheung, H. 1977. A study on the use of Yige. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers
Association 12(1): 2–7.
Comrie, B. 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Comrie, B. 1985. Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Comrie, B., and S.A. Thompson. 2007. Lexical nominalization. In Language typology and
syntactic description: Vol. 3, grammatical categories and the lexicon, 2nd ed, ed. T. Shopen,
334–381. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crystal, D. 2008. A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics, 6th ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Dagan, I., A. Itai, and U. Schwall. 1991. Two languages are more informative than one. In
Proceedings of the 29th annual meeting of the ACL, 130–137. Berkeley.
Dai, G. 2009. The applications of keywords and collocations to translation studies and teaching.
Translation Journal 13(3). Retrieved from: http://translationjournal.net/journal/49corpus.htm
DeFrancis, J. 1984. The Chinese language: Fact and fantasy. Honolulu: University of Hawaii
Press.
Pergamon Press.
Eifring, H. 1995. Clause combination in Chinese. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Frawley, W. 1984/2000. Prolegomenon to a theory of translation. In The translation studies
reader, ed. L. Venuti, 250–263. London/New York: Routledge.
Gellerstam, M. 2005. Fingerprints in translation. In In and out of English: For better, for worse?
ed. G. Anderman and M. Rogers, 201–213. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters LTD.
Gerner, M. 2012. The typology of nominalization. Language and Linguistics 13(4): 803–844.
Gil, D. 1987. Definiteness, noun phrase configurationality, and the count-mass distinction. In The
representation of (In)defniteness, ed. E.J. Reuland and A.G.B. ter Meulen, 254–269. Cam-
bridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gommlich, K., and E. Erdim. 2001. Evolving imagery in the translation of Orhan Pamuk’s Kara
Kitap. Across Languages and Cultures 2(2): 237–249.
Gottlieb, H. 2005. Anglicism and translation. In In and out of English: For better, for worse?
ed. G. Anderman and M. Rogers, 161–184. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Granger, S. 2003/2007. The corpus approach: A common way forward for contrastive linguistics
and translation studies. In Corpus-based approaches to contrastive linguistics and translation
studies, ed. S. Granger, J. Lerot, and S. Petch-Tyson, 17–29. Beijing: Foreign Language
Teaching and Research Press.
218 References
Gunn, E. 1991. Rewriting Chinese: Style and innovation in twentieth-century Chinese prose.
Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Halliday, M.A.K. 2005. Computational and quantitative studies. In Collected works of M. A.
K. Halliday, ed. Jonathan Webster, Vol. 6. London: Continuum.
Halliday, M.A.K., and E. McDonald. 2004. Metafunctional profile of the grammar of Chinese. In
Language typology: A functional perspective, ed. A. Caffarel, J.R. Martin, and
C.M.I.M. Matthiessen, 305–396. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing
Company.
Hansen, S. 2003. The nature of translated text: An interdisciplinary methodology for the investi-
gation of the specific properties of translations. Doctoral thesis. Saarbr€ ucken: DFKI &
Saarland University.
Hansen, S., and E. Teich. 2001. Multi-layer analysis of translation corpora: Methodological issues
and practical implications. In Proceedings of EUROLAN 2001 workshop on multi-layer
corpus-based analysis, 44–55, Iasi.
Hansen-Schirra, S., and E. Steiner. 2012. Towards a typology of translation properties. In Cross-
linguistic corpora for the study of translations: Insights from language pair English-German,
Harbsmeier, C. 1998. Joseph Needham: Science and civilisation in China (Vol VII.1: Language
and logic). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Harris, A.C., and L. Campbell. 1995. Historical syntax in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge:
Hassan, I. 2002. The Australian spiritual journey. In The best Australian essays 2002,
ed. P. Craven, 287–299. Melbourne: Black Inc.
Hatim, B. 1997. Communication across cultures: Translation theory and contrastive text linguis-
tics. Devon: University of Exeter Press.
Hatim, B., and I. Mason. 1997. The translator as communicator. London/New York: Routledge.
Heine, B., and T. Kuteva. 2002. World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Hermans, T. 1996. The translator’s voice in translated narrative. Target 8(1): 23–48.
Hopkinson, C. 2007. Factors in linguistic interference: A case of study in translation. SKASE
Journal of Translation and Interpretation 2(1): 12–23.
Hopper, P.J., and S.A. Thompson. 1984. The discourse basis for lexical categories in universal
grammar. Language 60(4): 703–752.
Hopper, P.J., and E.C. Traugott. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Hopper, P.J., and E.C. Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
House, J. 2006a. Communicative styles in English and German. European Journal of English
Studies 10(3): 249–267.
House, J. 2006b. Covert translation, language contact, variation and change. SYNAPS – A Journal
of Professional Communication 19: 25–47.
House, J. 2007. Covert translation, language contact and language change. Chinese Translators
Journal 28(3): 17–25.
House, J. 2008. Beyond intervention: Universals in translation. trans-kom 1: 6–19.
House, J. 2011. Using translation and parallel text corpora to investigate the influence of global
English on textual norms in other languages. In Corpus-based translation studies: Research
and applications, ed. A. Kruger, K. Wallmach, and J. Munday, 187–210. London/New York:
Continuum International Publishing Group.
References 219
Hsu, J. 1994. Englishization and language change in modern Chinese in Taiwan. World Englishes
13(2): 167–184.
Huang, C. 1996. Review of Federico Masini ‘The formation of modern Chinese lexicon and its
evolution toward a national language: The period from 1840 to 1898’. The China Quarterly
145: 230–231.
Huang, C., and J. Lin. 2013. The ordering of Mandarin Chinese light verbs. In Chinese lexical
semantics (CLSW 2012, LNAI 7717), ed. D. Ji and G. Xiao, 728–735. Heidelberg: Springer.
Hunston, S. 2002. Corpora in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
James, C. 1980/2005. Contrastive analysis. Qingdao: Qingdao Chubanshe.
Jantunen, J.H. 2004. Untypical patterns in translations: Issues on corpus methodology and
synonymity. In Translation universals: Do they exist? ed. A. Mauranen and P. Kujamäki,
101–126. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Johansson, S. 2007. Seeing through multilingual corpora: On the use of corpora in contrastive
studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kachru, B.B. 1994. Englishization and contact linguistics. World Englishes 13(2): 135–154.
Kao, Y. 1994. The nineteen old poems and the aesthetics of self-reflection. In The power of
culture: Studies in Chinese cultural history, ed. W.J. Peterson, A. Plaks, and Y.-s. Yu, 80-102.
Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.
Kauhanen, I. 2006. Norms and sociolinguistic description. In A man of measure: Festschrift in
honour of Fred Karlsson on his 60th birthday (a special supplement to SKY Journal of
Linguistics, vol 19: 2006), ed. M. Suominen, A. Arppe, A. Airola, O. Heinämäki,
M. Miestamo, U. Määttä, J. Niemi, K.K. Pitkänen, and K. Sinnemäki, 34–46. Turku: The
Linguistic Association of Finland.
Kennedy, G.A. 1951. The monosyllabic myth. Journal of the American Oriental Society 71(3):
161–166.
Kenny, D. 1998. Creatures of habit? What translators usually do with words. Meta: Translators’
Journal 43(4): 515–523.
Kenny, D. 2001. Lexis and creativity in translation: A corpus-based study. Manchester: St. Jerome
Publishing.
Kenny, D. 2006. Corpus-based translation studies: A quantitative or qualitative development.
Journal of Translation Studies 9(1): 43–58.
Kirkpatrick, A. 1996. Topic-comment or modifier-modified? Information structure in modern
standard Chinese. Studies in Language 20(1): 93–113.
Kit, C., J.J. Webster, K.K. Sin, H. Pan, and H. Li. 2004. Clause alignment for bilingual HK legal
texts: A lexical based approach. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 9(1): 29–51.
Klaudy, K. 1998. Explicitation. In Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies, ed. M. Baker,
80–85. London/New York: Routledge.
Klinger, S. 2015. Translation and linguistic hybridity: Constructing world-view. New York:
Routledge.
Kranich, S., and A. Bicsár. 2012. “These forecasts may be substantially different from actual
results”. The use of epistemic modal markers in English and German original letters to
shareholders and in English-German translations. Linguistik Online 55(5): 41–56.
Kranich, S., V. Becher, and S. H€oder. 2011a. A tentative typology of translation-induced language
change. In Multilingual discourse production: Diachronic and synchronic perspectives,
ed. S. Kranich, V. Becher, S. H€oder, and J. House, 11–43. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John
Benjamins Publishing Company.
Kranich, S., V. Becher, S. H€oder, and J. House (eds.). 2011b. Multilingual discourse production:
Diachronic and synchronic perspectives. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publish-
ing Company.
220 References
lishing Company.
Kruger, H., and B. Rooy. 2012. Register and the features of translated language. Across Languages
Kubler, C.C. 1985. A study of Europeanized grammar in modern written Chinese. Taipei: Student
Book Company.
Kuo, P., and J. Ting. 2007. Light verb, heavy verb, and verbal noun in Mandarin Chinese.
Proceedings of the 9th Seoul International Conference on Generative Grammar (SICOGG
9), 349–357. Seoul, South Korea
Labov, W. 1991. Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Laviosa, S. 1998b. The corpus-based approach: A new paradigm in translation studies. Meta:
Translators’ Journal 43(4): 474–479.
Laviosa, S. 2000. TEC: A resource for studying what is “IN” and “OF” translational English.
Laviosa, S. 2002. Corpus-based translation studies: Theory, findings, applications. Amsterdam:
Rodopi.
Laviosa, S. 2004. Corpus-based translation studies: Where does it come from? Where is it going?
Language Matters 35(1): 6–27.
Laviosa, S. 2011a. Corpus linguistics and translation studies. In Perspectives on corpus linguistics,
ed. V. Viana, S. Zyngier, and G. Barnbrook, 131–154. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benja-
Laviosa, S. 2011b. Corpus-based translation studies: Where does it come from? Where is it going?
In Corpus-based translation studies: Research and applications, ed. A. Kruger, K. Wallmach,
and J. Munday, 13–32. London/New York: Continuum.
Laviosa-Braithwaite, S. 1998. Universals of translation. In Routledge encyclopedia of translation
studies, ed. M. Baker, 288–291. New York: Routledge.
Lefer, M. 2012. Word-formation in translated language: The impact of language-pair specific
features and genre variation. Across Languages and Cultures 13(2): 145–172.
Lehrer, A. 1986. English classifier constructions. Lingua 68: 109–148.
Levý, J. 2011. The Art of Translation. Trans. Patrick Corness. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
Publishing Company.
Li, C. 1962. New features in Chinese grammatical usage. Berkeley: University of California.
Li, F. 1973. Languages and dialects of China. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 1(1): 1–13.
corpus-assisted translation research in China. In Using corpora in contrastive and translation
studies, ed. R. Xiao, 235–254. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Li, D., C. Zhang, and K. Liu. 2011. Translation style and ideology: A corpus-assisted analysis of
two English translations of Hongloumeng. Literary and Linguistic Computing 26(2): 153–166.
Lin, H. 2001. A grammar of mandarin Chinese: Languages of the world/materials. Munich:
Lincom Europa.
Malmkjær, K. 2005. Norms and nature in translation studies. SYNAPS 16: 13–19.
Malmkjær, K. 2008. Norms and nature in translation studies. In Incorporating corpora: The
linguist and the translator, ed. G. Anderman and M. Rogers, 49–59. Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters LTD.
Mauranen, A. 1999. Will ‘translationese’ ruin a contrastive study? Languages in Contrast 2(2):
161–185.
References 221
Mauranen, A. 2008. Universal tendencies in translation. In Incorporating corpora: The linguist

and the translator, ed. G. Anderman and M. Rogers, 32–48. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters
LTD.
Mauranen, A., and P. Kujamäki (eds.). 2004. Translation universals: Do they exist? Amsterdam/
McEnery, T., and A. Hardie. 2012. Corpus linguistics: Method theory and practice. Cambridge:
McEnery, T., and R. Xiao. 2007. Quantifying constructions in English and Chinese: A corpus-
based contrastive study. Paper presented at the proceedings of Corpus Linguistics 2007,
28–30 July 2007, Birmingham University.
McEnery, T., and A. Wilson. 2001. Corpus linguistics: An introduction, 2nd ed. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press.
McEnery, T., and R. Xiao. 2008. Parallel and comparable corpora: What is happening? In
Incorporating corpora: The linguist and the translator, ed. G. Anderman and M. Rogers,
18–31. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters LTD.
McEnery, T., and Z. Xiao. 2004, May 24–30. The Lancaster corpus of Mandarin Chinese: A
corpus for monolingual and contrastive language study. Paper presented at the fourth interna-
tional conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC) 2004, Lisbon.
McEnery, T., S. Piao, and X. Xin. 2000. Parallel alignment in English and Chinese. In Multilingual
corpora in teaching and research, ed. S.P. Botley, A.M. McEnery, and A. Wilson, 177–191.
Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Munday, J. 2008. Introducing translation studies: Theories and applications, 2nd ed. -
Mutesayire, M. 2005. Cohesive devices and explicitation in translated English: A corpus-based
study. PhD thesis. University of Manchester.
Nagy T.I., V. Vincze, and R. Farkas. 2013. Full-coverage identification of English light verb
constructions. Paper presented at the international joint conference on natural language
processing, Nagoya, Japan, 14–18 October 2013.
Neubert, A. 2001. Some implications of regarding translations as hybrid texts. Across Languages
Neubert, A., and G.M. Shreve. 1992. Translation as text. Kent: The Kent State University Press.
Neumann, S. 2012. Conclusions and outlook: An empirical perspective on translation studies. In
Cross-linguistic corpora for the study of translation: Insights from the language pair English-
German, ed. S. Hansen-Schirra, S. Neumann, and E. Steiner, 283–287. Berlin: Walter de
Gruyter GmbH.
Neumann, S., and S. Hansen-Schirra. 2012. Corpus methodology and design. In Cross-linguistic
corpora for the study of translations: Insights from the language pair English-German, ed. S. -
Hansen-Schirra, S. Neumann, and E. Steiner, 21–34. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH.
Nippold, M.A., J.M. Ward-Lonergan, and J.L. Fanning. 2005. Persuasive writing in children,
adolescents, and adults: A study of syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic development. Language,
Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools 36: 125–138.
Norman, J. 1988. Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oakes, M., and T. McEnery. 2000. Bilingual text alignment: An overview. In Multilingual corpora
in teaching and research, ed. S.P. Botley, A.M. McEnery, and A. Wilson, 1–37. Amsterdam:
Rodopi.
Olohan, M. 2001. Spelling out the optionals in translation: A corpus study. UCREL Technical
Papers 13: 423–432.
Olohan, M. 2002. Leave it out! Using a comparable corpus to investigate aspects of explicitation in
translation. Cadernos de Traduç~ ao IX: 153–169.
Olohan, M. 2004. Introducing corpora in translation studies. London/New York: Routledge.
222 References
Olohan, M., and M. Baker. 2000. Reporting that in translated English: Evidence for subconscious
processes of explicitation? Across Languages and Cultures 1(2): 141–158.
Packard, J.L. (ed.). 1997. New approaches to Chinese word formation: Morphology, phonology,
and the lexicon in modern and ancient Chinese. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Packard, J.L. 2000/2004. The morphology of Chinese: A linguistic and cognitive approach.
Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
Peyraube, A. 2000. Westernization of Chinese grammar in the 20th century: Myth or reality?
Journal of Chinese Linguistics 28(1): 1–25.
Popper, K. 1959/2002. The logic of scientific discovery. London: Routledge Classics.
Puurtinen, T. 2003. Genre-specific features of translationese? Linguistic differences between
translated and non-translated Finnish children’s literature. Literary and Linguistic Computing
18(4): 389–406.
Pym, A. 2005. Explaining explicitation. In New trends in translation studies, ed. K. Károly and Á.
Foris, 29–43. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiado.
Pym, A. 2008. On Toury’s laws of how translators translate. In Beyond descriptive translation
studies investigations in homage to Gideon Toury, ed. A. Pym, M. Shlesinger, and D. Simeoni,
311–328. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Reppen, R., S.M. Fitzmaurice, and D. Biber (eds.). 2002. Using corpora to explore linguistic
variation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Robinson, D. 1997. Translation and empire: Postcolonial theories explained. Manchester:
St. Jerome.
Roksvold, T. 2010. Changes in newspaper language explored as changes in cultural norms.
Intercultural Communication Studies XIX(3): 104–111.
Ross, C., and J.S. Ma. 2006. Modern Mandarin Chinese grammar: A practical guide. London:
Routledge.
Sapir, E. 1921. Language: An introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
Schäffner, C., and B. Adab. 2001a. The idea of the hybrid text in translation revisited. Across
Languages and Cultures 2(2): 277–302.
Schäffner, C., and B. Adab. 2001b. The idea of the hybrid text in translation: Contact as conflict.
Scott, M. 2010. WordSmith tools (Version 5.0). Liverpool: Lexical Analysis Software Ltd.
Simon, S. 2001. Cultural and textual hybridity. Across Languages and Cultures 2(2): 217–226.
Sinclair, J. 1991. Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Snell-Hornby, M. 2001. The space ‘in between’ what is hybrid text. Across Languages and
Cultures 2(2): 207–216.
Steiner, E. 2001. Translations English-German: Investigating the relative importance of systemic
contrasts and of the text type ‘translation’. SPRIKreports 7: 1–49.
Steiner, E. 2002. Grammatical metaphor in translation. In Information structure in a cross-
linguistic perspective, ed. H. Hasselgård, S. Johansson, B. Behrens, and C. Fabricius-Hansen,
213–228. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Steiner, E. 2004. Translated texts: Properties, variants and evaluations. Frankfurt am Main: Peter
Lang GmbH.
Steiner, E. 2005. Explicitation, its lexicogrammatical realization, and its determining (indepen-
dent) variables – Towards an empirical and corpus-based methodology. SPRIKreports 36:
1–43.
languages, ed. P. Siemund and N. Kintana, 317–346. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing
Company.
References 223
Steiner, E. 2008b. Explicitation: Towards an empirical and corpus-based methodology. In Mean-

ing in context: Strategies for implementing intelligent applications of language studies,
Steiner, E. 2012. Generating hypotheses and operationalizations: The example of explicitness/
explicitation. In Cross-linguistic corpora for the study of translations: Insights from the
language pair English-German, ed. S. Hansen-Schirra, S. Neumann, and E. Steiner, 55–70.
Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH.
Stewart, D. 2000. Conventionality, creativity and translated text: The implications of electronic
corpora in translation. In Intercultural faultlines. Research models in translation studies 1:
Textual and cognitive aspects, ed. M. Olohan, 73–91. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
Stubbs, M. 2001. Texts, corpora, and problems of interpretation: A response to Widdowson.
Applied Linguistics 22(2): 149–172.
Sumser, J. 2001. A guide to empirical research in communication: Rules for looking. London:
Sage Publications, Inc.
Sun, C. 2006. Chinese: A linguistic introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tai, J.H.-Y. 1992. Variation in classifier systems across Chinese dialects: Towards a cognition-
based semantic approach. Chinese language and linguistics 1: Chinese dialects, Symposium
Series of the Institute of History and Philology no. 2, Academia Sinica, 587–608.
Tai, J.H. 1994. Chinese classifier systems and human categorization. In In honor of William S.-Y.
Wang: Interdisciplinary studies on language and language change, ed. W.S.-Y. Wang,
M.Y. Chen, and O.J.L. Tzeng, 1–19. Taipei: Pyramid Press.
Tam, K.-k. (ed.). 2009. Englishization in Asia: Language and cultural issues. Hong Kong: Open
University of Hong Kong Press.
Tan, Y.F., M. Kan, and H. Cui. 2006. Extending corpus-based identification of light verb
constructions using a supervised learning framework. Paper presented at the proceedings of
the EACL 2006 workshop on multi-word-expressions in a multilingual context (MWEmc),
Trento, Italy.
Teich, E., and E. Steiner. 2001. Towards a model for the description of cross-linguistic divergence
and commonality in translation. In Exploring translation and multilingual text production:
Beyond content, ed. E. Steiner and C. Yallop, 191–227. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Teubert, W. 1996. Comparable or parallel corpora? International Journal of Lexicography 9(3):
238–264.
Teubert, W., and R. Krishnamurthy (eds.). 2007. Corpus linguistics: Critical concepts in linguis-
tics. London/New York: Routledge.
Tirkkonen-Condit, S. 2001. EU project proposals as hybrid texts. Across Languages and Cultures
2(2): 261–264.
Tognini-Bonelli, E. 2001. Corpus linguistics at work. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Company.
Toury, G. 1995. Descriptive translation studies and beyond. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John
Toury, G. 2012. Descriptive translation studies – And beyond. Revised edition. Amsterdam: John
Trosborg, A. (ed.). 1997. Text typology and translation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Company.
Tsai, F. 1995. Europeanized structure in English-Chinese translation. In An encyclopaedia of
translation: Chinese-English. English-Chinese, ed. S.-W. Chan and D.E. Pollard, 242–248.
Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.
224 References
Tse, Y. 2010. Parataxis and hypotaxis in the Chinese language. International Journal of Arts and
Sciences 3(16): 351–359.
Tymoczko, M. 1998. Computerized corpora and the future of translation studies. Meta: Trans-
lators’ Journal 43(4): 652–660.
Venuti, L. 1995. The translator’s invisibility: A history of translation. London/New York:
Routledge.
Venuti, L. (ed.). 2000. The translation studies reader. London/New York: Routledge.
Venuti, L. (ed.). 2012. The translation studies reader, 3rd ed. London: Routledge.
Vinay, J., and J. Darbelnet. 1958/2000. A methodology for translation. In The translation studies
reader, ed. L. Venuti, 84–93. New York: Routledge.
Wang, Y., and T. Ikeda. 2008. Translation of the light verb constructions in Japanese-Chinese
machine translation. Advances in Natural Language Processing and Applications Research in
Computing Science 33: 139–150.
Wang, K., and H. Qin. 2010. A parallel corpus-based study of translational Chinese. In Using
corpora in contrastive and translation studies, ed. R. Xiao, 164–181. Newcastle: Cambridge
Scholars Publishing.
Wang, K., and H. Qin. 2014. What is peculiar to translational Mandarin Chinese? A corpus-based
study of Chinese constructions’ load capacity. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 10(1):
57–77.
Williams, D.A. 2005. Recurrent features of translation in Canada: A corpus-based study. Doctoral
thesis, University of Ottawa.
Xia, Y. 2010. A corpus-based study of normalization in English-Chinese translated fiction: A
diachronic perspective. Doctoral dissertation, Shan Dong University.
Xia, Y. 2014. Normalization in translation: Corpus-based diachronic research into twentieth-
century English-Chinese fictional translation. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars
Publishing.
Xiao, R. 2006a. REVIEW: Xaira – An XML aware indexing and retrieval architecture. Corpora 1
(1): 99–103.
Xiao, R. 2006b. Using corpora to study classifiers in Mandarin Chinese. Paper presented at COST
Action A31: Stability and adaptation of classification systems in a cross-cultural perspective,
Berlin, Germany.
Xiao, R. 2010. How different is translated Chinese from native Chinese? A corpus-based study of
translation universals. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 15(1): 5–35.
Xiao, R. 2011. Word clusters and reformulation markers in Chinese and English: Implications for
translation universal hypotheses. Languages in Contrast 11(2): 145–171.
Xiao, R. 2012. Contrastive corpus linguistics: Cross-linguistic contrast of English and Chinese.
Paper presented at the Corpus Technologies & Applied Linguistics: An international confer-
ence XJTLU, 28–30th June 2012.
Xiao, R., and G. Dai. 2014. Lexical and grammatical properties of translational Chinese: Trans-
Xiao, R., and X. Hu. 2015. Corpus-based studies of translational Chinese in English-Chinese
translation. Berlin: Springer.
Xiao, R., and T. McEnery. 2004. Aspect in Mandarin Chinese. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
Publishing Company.
Xiao, R., and N. Wei. 2014. Translation and contrastive linguistic studies at the interface of
English and Chinese: Significance and implications. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory
10(1): 1–10.
Xiao, R., and M. Yue. 2009. Using corpora in translation studies: The state of the art. In
Contemporary corpus linguistics, ed. P. Baker, 237–261. London: Continuum International
Publishing Group.
References 225
Xiao, R., L. He, and M. Yue. 2010. Using the ZJU corpus of translational Chinese in translation
studies. In Using corpora in contrastive and translation studies, ed. R. Xiao, 182–214.
Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Zanettin, F. 2013. Corpus methods for descriptive translation studies. Procedia – Social and
Behavioral Sciences 95: 20–32.
Zauberga, I. 2001. Discourse interference in translation. Across Languages and Cultures 2(2):
265–276.
Chinese References
“Guhanyu Changyongzi Zidian” Bianxiezu. (ed.). 2003. Guhanyu Changyongzi Zidian (Ancient
Chinese commonly used words dictionary). Lanzhou: Gansu Education Press. [hh古汉语常用
字字典ii编写组. (2003). hh古汉语常用字字典ii. 兰州: 甘肃教育出版社.]
Beijing Shifan Xueyuan Zhongwenxi Hanyujiaoyanzu, Zhongguo Yuwen Zazhishe. (ed.). 1959.
Wusi Yilai Hanyu Shumian Yuyan de Bianqian he Fazhan (Changes and developments in the
Chinese written language since the May Fourth Movement). Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan.
[北京师范学院中文系汉语教研组编著, 中国语文杂志社编. (1959). hh五四以来汉语书面
语言的变迁和发展ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
Cai, W. 1986. Dai Feimingcixing Binyu de Dongci (Verbs with non-nouny objects). Zhongguo
Yuwen (Studies of the Chinese Language) (4): 253–260. [蔡文兰. (1986). 带非名词性宾语的
动词. hh中国语文ii,(4), 253–260.]
Chen, G. 1994. Hanyu Cifa Lun (On Chinese morphology). Shanghai: Xuelin Chubanshe.[陈光磊.
(1994). hh汉语词法论ii. 上海: 学林出版社.]
Dai, G. 2008. Jiyu Yuliaoku de Yinghanyu Cihui Huyi Yanjiu (A corpus-based translation
between Chinese and English). Xiamen Ligong Xueyuan Xuebao (Journal of Xiamen Univer-
sity of Technology) 16(3): 94–98. [戴光荣. (2008). 基于语料库的英汉语词汇互译研究. hh厦
门理工学院学报ii, 16(3), 94–98.]
Dai, G. 2013a. Hanyu Yiwen Dapei Tezheng Yanjiu: Yuanyu Touguo Xiaoying Yanjiu (Collo-
cational features in translated Chinese: A case study of source language shining through).
Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies (1): 50–56. [戴光荣. (2013a). 汉语译文搭配特征
研究: “源语透过效应”个案探讨. hh当代外语研究ii,(1), 50–56.]
Dai, G. 2013b. Fanyi zhong Yuanyu Touguo Xiao Yanjiu (“SL shining through” in translated
Dai, G., and R. Xiao. 2011b. Yiwen zhong Yuanyu Touguo Xiaoying Yanjiu: Jiyu Yuliaoku de
corpus-based study of Chinese translation of English passives). Translation Quarterly (62):
85–107. [戴光荣, 肖忠华. (2011b). 译文中 “源语透过效应”研究——基于语料库的英译汉
被动句研究. hh翻译季刊ii, (62), 85–107.]
Dai, G., and Y. Song. 2014. Haxi Suanfa yu yuyi yingshe zai yuliaoku duiqi zhong de yunyong
(Applications of hash algorithms and semantic mapping in C-E sentential alignment). Journal
of Fujian University of Technology 12(5): 454–459. [戴光荣, 宋玉春. (2014). 哈希算法与语
义映射在语料库对齐中的运用. hh福建工程学院学报ii,12, (5): 454–459.]
Dai, G., and Z. Xiao. 2010. Jiyu Zijian Yinghan Fanyi Yuliaoku de Fanyi Mingxihua Yanjiu
(Corpus-based studies on explicitation in translation). Chinese Translators Journal (1): 76–80.
[戴光荣, 肖忠华. (2010). 基于自建英汉翻译语料库的翻译明晰化研究. hh中国翻译ii,
(1),76–80.]
Dai, G., and Z. Xiao. 2011a. Hanyu Yiwen zhong de Huayu Chongshu Biaoji: Jiyu Yuliaoku de
Yanjiu (RMs in translated Chinese: A corpus-based study). Foreign Language and Literature
(3): 184–193. [戴光荣, 肖忠华. (2011a). 汉语译文中的话语重述标记: 基于语料库的研究.
hh外国语言文学ii, (3), 184–193.]
226 References
Diao, Y. 2004. Xiandai Hanyu Xuyi Dongci Yanjiu (Studies on modern Chinese light verbs).
Dalian: Liaoning Shifan Daxue Chubanshe. [刁晏斌. (2004). hh现代汉语虚义动词研究ii. 大
连: 辽宁师范大学出版社.]
Diao, Y. 2006. Xiandai HanyuShi (A history of modern Chinese). Fuzhou: Fujian Renmin
Ding, S., S. L€u, and R. Li, et al. 1961/1999. Xiandai Hanyu Yufa Jianghua (Talks on modern
Chinese Grammar). Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [丁声树, 吕叔湘, 李荣, 等. (1961/1999).
hh现代汉语语法讲话ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
Dong, X. 2002. Cihuihua: Hanyu Shuangyinci de Yansheng he Fazhan (Lexicalization: The origin
and evolution of Chinese disyllabic words). Chengdu: Sichuang Minzu Chubanshe. [董秀芳.
(2002). hh词汇化: 汉语双音词的衍生和发展ii. 成都: 四川民族出版社.]
Dong, X. 2005. Hanyu Cizhui de Xingzhi yu Hanyu Cifa Tedian (On Chinese affixes and related
morphological properties). Chinese Language Learning (6): 13–19. [董秀芳. (2005). 汉语词
缀的性质与汉语词法特点. hh汉语学习ii, (6), 13–19.]
Dong, X. 2011. Cihuihua: Hanyu Shuangyinci de Yansheng he Fazhan(Xiudingben) (Lexicaliza-
tion: The origin and evolution of Chinese disyllabic words. Revised version). Beijing:
Shangwu Yinshuguan. [董秀芳. (2011). hh词汇化: 汉语双音节词的衍生和发展(修订本)ii.
Feng, Z. 2010. Jiyu Yuliaoku de Jiqi Fanyi Xitong (Corpus-based machine translation systems).
Shuyu Biaozhunhua yu Xinxijishu (Terminology Standardization & Information Technology)
(1): 28–35. [冯志伟. (2010). 基于语料库的机器翻译系统. hh术语标准化与信息技术ii, (1),
28–35.]
Gao, M. 1986. Hanyu Yufalun (On Chinese grammar). Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [高名凯.
(1986). hh汉语语法论ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
Gao, Y. 2009. Gushi Shijiushou yu Zisheng Meidian (The nineteen old poems and the aesthetics of
self-reflection). In Zhongguo Shuqing Chuantong de Zai Faxian (Rediscovery of Chinese
lyrical tradition), ed. S. Ke, and C. Xiao, 223–245. Taibei: Taida Chuban Zhongxin. [高友
工. (2009). hh古诗十九首ii与自省美典. 柯庆民、肖驰, hh中国抒情传统的再发现ii
(pp. 223–245). 台北: 台大出版中心.]
Guo, H. 2005. Yingyu dui Xiandai Hanyu de Yingxiang: Yuyan Renzhi Yanjiufa (The influence of
English on modern Chinese: A cognitive research). Shanghai Shi: Shanghai Jiaotong Daxue
Chubanshe. [郭鸿杰. (2005). hh英语对现代汉语的影响: 语言认知研究法ii. 上海: 上海交通
大学出版社.]
Han, Z. 2005. Wenxue Fanyi Zahe Yanjiu (Hybridity and literary translation). Shanghai: Shanghai
Yiwen Chubanshe. [韩子满. (2005). hh文学翻译杂合研究ii. 上海: 上海译文出版社.]
He, X. 2003. Yinghan Fanyi Guochengzhong de mingxihua Xianxiang (Explicitation in English-
Chinese translation processes). Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages 26(4): 63–65.
[贺显斌. (2003). 英汉翻译过程中的明晰化现象. hh解放军外国语学院学报ii, 26(4), 63–65.]
He, Y. 2004. Cong Xiandai Hanyu Jiechuzhong de Ouhua Xianxiang kan Jianjie Yuyan Jiechu
(Indirectional language contact from Europeanization of modern Chinese). Applied Linguistics
(4): 82–89. [贺阳. (2004). 从现代汉语接触中的欧化现象看间接语言接触. hh语言文字应
用ii, (4), 82–89.]
He, Y. 2006. Xiandai Hanyu DV Jiegou de Xingqi ji Fazhan yu Yinou Yuyan de Yingxiang (The
appearance of DV constructions in modern Chinese and influences from Indo-European
languages). Journal of Renmin University of China (2): 136–142. [贺阳. (2006). 现代汉语
DV结构的兴起及发展与印欧语言的影响. hh中国人民大学学报ii, (2), 136–142.]
He, W. 2008. Yingyihan zhong xin de Yinyu Chonggou (Translation of metaphors with ‘xin’
(heart) in Chinese: Based on instances from a Chinese-English parallel corpus). Sichuan Waiyu
Xueyuan Xuebao (Journal of Sichuan International Studies University) (2): 129–134. [贺文照.
(2008). 英译汉中“心”的隐喻重构: 基于汉英平行语料库的考察. hh四川外语学院学报ii,
(2), 129–134.]
References 227
He, Y. 2008a. Xiandai Hanyu Ouhua Yufa Xianxiang Yanjiu (Studies on Europeanized Chinese
grammar). Chinese Teaching in the World (4): 16–31. [贺阳. (2008a). 现代汉语欧化语法现
象研究. hh世界汉语教学ii,(4), 16–31.]
商务印书馆.]
He, W. 2010. Woguo Yuliaoku yu Fanyijiaoxue (Corpus-based research on translation teaching in
China: Achievements and problems). Jiaxing Xueyuan Xuebao (Journal of Jiaxing University)
22(2): 100–105. [贺文照. (2010). 我国语料库与翻译教学: 成绩与问题. hh嘉兴学院学报ii,
22(2), 100–105.]
Hu, Z. 1982. Guowai Hanying Duibi Yanjiu Zatan 2 (Talks on Chinese-English contrastive studies
in foreign countries: 2). Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies (2): 117–128. [胡壮麟.
(1982). 国外汉英对比研究杂谈(二、续完). hh语言教学与研究ii,(2), 117–128.]
Hu, M. 1991. Yuyanxue Lunwenxuan (Collections of linguistics). Beijing: Zhongguo Renmin
Daxue Chubanshe. [胡明扬. (1991). hh语言学论文选ii. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社.]
Hu, M. 2002. Xinzhu Guoyu Wenfa de zai Renshi (Reevaluation of a new grammar of the Chinese
national language). Language Science 1(1): 92–101. [胡明扬. (2002). hh新著国语文法ii的再
认识和再评价. hh语言科学ii, 1(1), 92–101.]
Hu, M. 2003. Hu MingyangYuyanxue Lunwenji (Collections of articles on linguistics by Hu
Mingyang). Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [胡明扬. (2003). hh胡明扬语言学论文集ii. 北
京: 商务印书馆.]
Hu, K. 2011. Yuliaoku Fanyixue Gailun (Introduction to corpus-based translation studies).
Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong Daxue Chubanshe. [胡开宝. (2011). hh语料库翻译学概论ii. 上
海: 上海交通大学出版社.]
Hu, K., and Q. Tao. 2009. Hanying Huiyi Kouyi zhong Yupian Yiyi Xianhua jiqi Dongyin Yanjiu
(Explicitation in the Chinese-English conference interpreting and its motivation). Journal of
PLA University of Foreign Languages 32(4): 67–73. [胡开宝, 陶庆. (2009). 汉英会议口译中
语篇意义显化及其动因研究. hh解放军外国语学院学报ii, 32(4), 67–73.]
Hu, K., Y. Wu, and Q. Tao. 2007. Yuliaoku yu Yixue Yanjiu: Qushi yu Wenti (Trends and
problems in corpus-based translation studies). Journal of Foreign Languages (5): 64–69. [胡开
宝, 吴勇, & 陶庆. (2007). 语料库与译学研究: 趋势与问题. hh外国语ii,(5), 64–69.]
Huang, L., and K. Wang. 2011. Yuliaoku Fanyixue: Keti yu Jinzhan (Corpus-based translation
studies: Issues and progress). Foreign Language Teaching and Research 43(6): 911–924. [黄
立波, 王克非. (2011). 语料库翻译学: 课题与进展. hh外语教学与研究ii, 43(6), 911–924.]
Li, J. 1987. Tan you SHI Goucheng de Panduanju de Jiben Xingshi Jiqi Luoji Yiyi (Judgement
sentences formed by SHI: Basic forms and logic meanings). Dongjiang Xuekan (4): 61–64. [李
健. (1987). 谈由 “是”构成的判断句的基本形式及其逻辑意义. hh东疆学刊ii, (4), 61–64.]
Li, Z., and Q. Liu (eds.). 2007. Li Jinxi Wenji (Collected works of Li Jinxi). Ha’erbin: Heilong-
jiang Jiaoyu Chubanshe. [黎泽渝, 刘庆俄. (2007). hh黎锦熙文集ii. 哈尔滨: 黑龙江教育出版
社.]
Li, W., T. Liu, Y. Zhang, and S. Li. 2006. Jiyu Changdu he Weizhi Xinxi de Shuangyu Juzi Duiqi
Fangfa (Bilingual sentence alignment method based on sentence length and location informa-
tion). Journal of Harbin Institute of Technology 38(5): 689–692. [李维刚, 刘挺, 张宇, 李生.
(2006). 基于长度和位置信息的双语句子对齐方法. hh哈尔滨工业大学学报ii, 38(5),
689–692.]
Lian, S. 1993. Yinghan Duibi Yanjiu (Contrastive studies of English and Chinese). Beijing:
verby languages and nouny languages). Chinese Teaching in the World 24(1): 3–17. [刘丹青.
语教学ii, 24(1), 3–17.]
228 References
u, S. (1952/2002). L€
L€ u Shuxiang Quanji Disijuan: Yufa Xiuci Jianghua (The complete works of L€ u
Shuxiang: Vol. 4 A talk on grammatical rhetoric). Shenyang: Liaoning Jiaoyu Chubanshe. [吕
叔湘. (1952/2002). hh吕叔湘全集第04卷-语法修辞讲话ii. 沈阳: 辽宁教育出版社.]
u, S. 1979. Hanyu Yufa Fenxi Wenti (Analysis of Chinese grammar problems). Beijing: Shangwu
L€
Yinshuguan. [吕叔湘. (1979). hh汉语语法分析问题ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
u, B. 1982. Guanyu ‘SHI. . .DE’ Jiegou de Jige Wenti (Some questions about the ‘SHI. . .DE’
L€
structure). Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies (4): 21–37. [吕必松. (1982). 关
于”是. . .. . .的”结构的几个问题. hh语言教学与研究ii, (4), 21–37.]
u, S. 1984/1999. Hanyu Yufa Lunwenji (Zengdingben) (Essays on Chinese grammar. Revised
L€
edition). Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [吕叔湘. (1984/1999). hh汉语语法论文集ii(增订本).
北京: 商务印书馆. ]
u, S. 1999. Xiandai Hanyu Babaici (Modern Chinese: 800 words. Revised edition). Beijing:
L€
Ma, J. (1983/1998). Mashi Wentong (The Chinese grammar). Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [马
建忠. (1983/1998). hh马氏文通ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
modern Chinese. Doctoral dissertation). Anhui University. [马春华. (2010). hh现代汉语欧化
Masini, F. 1997. The formation of modern Chinese lexicon and its evolution toward a national
language: The period from 1840 to 1898. Shanghai: Hanyu Dacidian Chubanshe. [意]马西尼
著, 黄河清译. (1997). 现代汉语词汇的形成: 十九世纪汉语外来词研究. 上海: 汉语大词典
出版社.
Meng, Z., et al. (eds.). 1999. Hanyu Dongci Yongfa Cidian (Dictionary of Chinese verb usages).
Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [孟琮, 郑怀德, 孟庆海, 蔡文兰. (1999). hh汉语动词用法词
典ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
Miao, C. 1999. Jinxingju de Yuyi Jiegou (Semantic structure of ‘Jinxing’ constructions). In
Jisuanyuyanxue Wenji (Selected Papers on Computational Linguistics), ed. C. Huang, and
Z. Dong, 51–57. Beijing: Qinghua Daxue Chubanshe. [苗传江. (1999). “进行”句的语义结构.
黄昌宁, 董振东, hh计算语言学文集ii (pp. 51–57). 北京: 清华大学出版社.]
Qi, H., and Q. Zhang. 2005. ‘Shi. . .De’ ju Yanjiu Shuping (A review of researches on ‘SHI. . .DE’
sentences). Journal of Radio & TV University (Philosophy & Social Sciences) (4): 37–40. [齐
沪扬, 张秋杭. (2005). “是. . .. . .的”句研究述评. hh广播电视大学学报(哲学社会科学版)ii,
(4), 37–40.]
Qin, H., and K. Wang. 2004. Jiyu Yuliaoku de Fanyi Yuyan Fenxi (Parallel corpora-based analysis
of translationese: The English ‘so. . .that’ structure and its Chinese equivalents in focus). Xiandai
Waiyu (Modern Foreign Languages) 27(1): 40–50. [秦洪武, 王克非. (2004). 基于语料库的翻
译语言分析——以” so. . .that” 的汉语对应结构为例. hh现代外语ii, 27(1), 40–50.]
Qin, H., and K. Wang. 2007. Duiyingyuliaoku zai Fanyi Jiaoxue zhong de Yingyong (Parallel
corpus in translation teaching: Theory and application). Zhongguo Fanyi (Chinese Translators
Journal) (5): 49–52. [秦洪武, 王克非. (2007). 对应语料库在翻译教学中的应用: 理论依据
和实施原则. hh中国翻译ii, (5), 49–52.]
Qin, H., and K. Wang. 2009. Jiyu Duiying Yuliaoku de Yingyihan Yuyan Tezheng Fenxin
(A parallel corpus-based study of Chinese as target language in E-C translation). Waiyu
Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu (Foreign Language Teaching and Research) 41(2): 131–138. [秦洪武, 王
克非. (2009). 基于对应语料库的英译汉语言特征分析. hh外语教学与研究ii, 41(2),
131–138.]
Qu, Q. 1931/1984. Gei Lu Xun de Xin (A letter to Lu Xun). In Fanyi Lunji (Collected papers for
translation), ed. X. Luo, 265–273. Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [瞿秋白. (1931/1984). 给鲁
迅的信. 罗新璋, hh翻译论集ii (pp. 265–273). 北京: 商务印书馆.]
References 229
Qu, C. 2005. Hanyu Renzhi Gongneng Yufa (A cognitive-functional grammar of Mandarin

Chinese). Ha’erbin: Heilongjiang Renmin Chubanshe. [屈承熙. (2005). hh汉语认知功能语
法ii. 哈尔滨: 黑龙江人民出版社.]
Ren, H. 2005. Chongxin Faxian Hanyu (Rediscovery of Chinese). Hanyu de Weiji (The crisis of
Chinese), ed. J. Zhu, 33–39. Beijing: Wenhua Yishu Chubanshe. [任洪渊. (2005). 重新发现汉
语. 朱竞, hh汉语的危机ii (pp. 33–39). 北京: 文化艺术出版社.]
Shen, G. 2011. Xiandai Hanyu Ouhua Yufa Xianxiang zhong de Riyu Yinsu Wenti (The Japanese
influence on the Europeanized Chinese grammar). “東アジア文化交渉研究”別冊 (7):
141–150. [沈国威. (2011). 现代汉语 “欧化语法现象”中的日语因素问题. “東アジア文化
交渉研究”別冊, (7), 141–150.]
Shi, Y. 2003. Xiandai Hanyu Yufa Xitong de Jianli: Dongbujiegou de Chansheng jiqi Yingxiang
(The establishment of modern Chinese grammar: The formation of resultative construction and
its effects). Beijing: Beijing Yuyan Daxue Chubanshe. [石毓智. (2003). hh现代汉语语法系统
的建立: 动补结构的产生及其影响ii. 北京: 北京语言大学出版社.]
Shi, Y. 2005a. Lun Panduan, Jiaodian, Qiangdiao yu Duibi zhi Guanxi: SHI de Yufa Gongneng he
Shiyong Tiaojian (The relationship between copula, focus, emphasis and comparison: The
function and usage of Shi). Yuyan Yanjiu (Studies in Language and Linguistics) 25(4): 43–53.
[石毓智. (2005a). 论判断、焦点、强调与对比之关系——“是”的语法功能和使用条件.
hh语言研究ii, 25(4), 43–53.]
Shi, Y. 2005b. Panduanci ‘SHI’ Goucheng Lianci de Gainian Jichu (The conceptual foundation of
the copula ‘SHI’ as a morphoeme of conjunctions). Hanyu Xuexi (Chinese Language Learn-
ing) (5): 3–10. [石毓智. (2005b). 判断词”是”构成连词的概念基础. hh汉语学习ii, (5), 3–10.]
Shi, D., and D. Wang. 2006. Xianggang Hanyu Shumianyu de Yufa Tedian (Grammatical features
of written in Chinese Hong Kong). Zhongguo Yuwen (Studies of the Chinese Language) (2):
118–127. [石定栩, 王冬梅. (2006). 香港汉语书面语的语法特点. hh中国语文ii, (2),
118–127.]
Shi, D., and J. Shao. 2006. Gangshi Zhongwen yu Yuyan Bianti (‘Hongkong Chinese’ and
language variations). Huadong Shifan Daxue Xuebao (Journal of East China Normal Univer-
sity) 38(2): 84–90. [石定栩, 邵敬敏. (2006). “港式中文”与语言变体. hh华东师范大学学报ii,
38(2), 84–90.]
Shi, Y., and J. Xu. 2001. Hanyushishang Yiwenju Xingshi de Leixingxue Zhuanbian jiqi Jizhi (The
process and mechanism of the typological change of the question form in the history of
Chinese: The emergence of the focus marker SHI and its effects). Zhongguo Yuwen (Studies
of the Chinese Language) (5): 454–466. [石毓智, 徐杰. (2001). 汉语史上疑问形式的类型学
转变及其机制——焦点标记”是”的产生及其影响. hh中国语文ii, (5), 454–466.]
Shi, Y., and N. Li. 2001. Hanyu Yufahua de Licheng: Xingtai Jufa Fazhan de Dongyin he Jizhi
(A history of grammaticalization in Chinese: Motivations and mechanisms of evolution of
Chinese morpho-syntax). Beijing: Beijing Daxue Chubanshe. [石毓智, 李讷. (2001). hh汉语语
法化的历程: 形态句法发展的动因和机制ii. 北京: 北京大学出版社.]
Shi, D., and Z. Zhu. 1999. Yingyu dui Xianggang Shumian Hanyu Jufa de Yingxiang (The
influence of English on Hong Kong Chinese syntactic structures). Waiguoyu (Journal of
Foreign Languages) (4): 2–11. [石定栩, 朱志瑜. (1999). 英语对香港书面汉语句法的影响.
hh外国语ii,(4), 2–11.]
Shi, D., and Z. Zhu. 2000. Yingyu yu Xianggang Shumian Hanyu (English influence on Hong
Kong written Chinese). Waiyu Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu (Foreign Language Teaching and
Researching) 32(3): 200–207. [石定栩, 朱志瑜. (2000). 英语与香港书面汉语. hh外语教学
与研究ii, 32(3), 200–207.]
Shi, D., and Z. Zhu. 2005. Yingyu dui Xianggang Shumian Hanyu Cihui de Yingxiang (English
influence on Hong Kong Written Chinese: The case of homographs). Waiguoyu (Journal of
Foreign Languages) (5): 2–9. [石定栩, 朱志瑜. (2005). 英语对香港书面汉语词汇的影
响——香港书面汉语和标准汉语中的同形异义词. hh外国语ii, (5), 2–9.]
Shi, D., J. Su, and Z. Zhu. 2001. Xianggang Shumianyu de Jufa Tedian (Syntactic features of
written Hong Kong Chinese). Zhongguo Yuwen (Studies of the Chinese Language) (6):
230 References
558–565. [石定栩, 苏金智, 朱志瑜. (2001). 香港书面语的句法特点. hh中国语文ii, (6),

558–565.]
Shi, D., Z. Zhu, and C. Wang. 2003. Xianggang Shumian Hanyu zhong de Yingyu Jufa Qianyi
(Syntactic shift in Hong Kong Written Chinese). Waiyu Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu (Foreign Language
Teaching and Research) 35(1): 4–13. [石定栩, 朱志瑜, 王灿龙. (2003). 香港书面汉语中的
英语句法迁移. hh外语教学与研究ii, 35(1), 4–13.]
Shi, D., J. Shao, and Z. Zhu. 2006. Gangshi Zhongwen yu Biaozhun Zhongwen de Bijiao
(‘Hongkong Chinese’ and Standard Chinese). Hong Kong: Hong Kong Educational Publishing
Company. [石定栩, 邵敬敏, 朱志瑜. (2006). hh港式中文与标准中文的比较ii. 香港: 香港教
育图书公司.]
Si, G. 1994. Fanyi Ouhua Jiegou Tantao (Europeanized structure in English-Chinese translation).
Zhongguo Yuwen Tongxun (Newsletter of Chinese Language) (29): 43–47. [思果. (1994). 翻译
欧化结构探讨. hh中国语文通讯ii, (29), 43–47.]
Vol. 1, Chinese grammar theory). Jinan: Shandong Education Press. [王力. (1984). hh王力文集
(第一卷)中国语法理论ii. 济南: 山东教育出版社.]
Li, Vol. 2, Modern Chinese grammar). Jinan: Shandong Edecation Press. [王力. (1985). hh王力
文集(第二卷)中国现代语法ii. 济南: 山东教育出版社.]
of Wang Li, Vol. 11, a history of Chinese grammar and vocabulary). Jinan: Shandong
Edecation Press. [王力. (1990). hh王力文集(第11卷)汉语语法史;汉语词汇史ii. 济南: 山东
教育出版社.]
Wang, G. 1997. Wang Guowei Wenji Disanjuan (The complete works of Wang Guowei: Vol. 3).
Beijing: Zhongguo Wenshi Chubanshe. [王国维. (1997). hh王国维文集(第三卷)ii. 北京: 中国
文史出版社.]
Wang, K. 1997. Fanyi Wenhua (On history of cultural translation). Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign
Education Press. [王克非. (1997). hh翻译文化史论ii. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社.]
Wang, H. 1999. Wenyan or Baihua: On the issue of translation language since the Late Qing.
Journal of Translation Studies, (3), 49–80.[王宏志. (1999). 文言与白话: 晚晴以来翻译语言
的考察. Journal of Translation Studies, (3), 49–80.]
Wang, H. 2000. Europeanization: Discussions on the language of translation during May Fourth
period. In Fanyi de Lilun Jiangou yu Wenhua Toushi (Theoretical Construction of Translation
from a Cultural Perspective), ed. T. Xie, 119–139. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language
Education Press. [王宏志. (2000). “欧化”: “五四”时期有关翻译语言的讨论. 谢天振, 翻译
的理论建构与文化透视 (pp. 119–139). 上海: 上海外语教育出版社.]
Wang, K. 2002. Jindai Fanyi dui Hanyu de Yingxiang (The translation influence on Chinese in
modern times). Waiyu Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu (Foreign Language Teaching and Research), 34(06):
458–463. [王克非. (2002). 近代翻译对汉语的影响. hh外语教学与研究ii, 34(06), 458–463.]
Wang, K. 2004. Shuangyu Duiyingyuliaoku Yanzhi yu Yingyong (Construction and Application of
E-C Parallel Corpus). Beijing: Waiyu Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu Chubanshe. [王克非. (2004). hh双语
Wang, Q. 2006. Huise: Yige Pianyi de Chidu (Obscurity in academic genre). Fujian Luntan
(Fujian Forum) (10): 78–81. [王茜. (2006). 晦涩: 一个偏移的尺度. hh福建论坛ii, (10),
78–81.]
Wang, H. 2011. Between translation and literature. Nanjing: Nanjing University Press. [王宏志.
(2011). 翻译与文学之间. 南京: 南京大学出版社.]
Wang, K. 2012. Yuliaoku Fanyixue Tansuo (Exploring corpus-based translation studies). Shang-
hai: Shanghai Jiaotong Daxue Chubanshe. [王克非. (2012). hh语料库翻译学探索ii. 上海: 上
海交通大学出版社.]
Wang, K., and H. Qin. 2009. Yingyihan Yuyan Tezheng Tantao: Jiyu Yuliaoku de Hongguan
Fenxi (A parallel corpus-based study of general features of translated Chinese). Waiyu Xuekan
References 231
(Foreign Language Research) (1): 102–105. [王克非, 秦洪武. (2009). 英译汉语言特征探

讨——基于对应语料库的宏观分析. hh外语学刊ii, (1), 102–105.]
Wang, H., and K. Zhang. 2014. Jiyu Yuliaoku de Qingdongci Jiegou Hanying Fanyi Yanjiu
(Corpus-based Chinese-English translation of light verb construction: ‘Jinxing’ as case
study). Jiefangjun Waiguoyu Xueyuan Xuebao (Journal of PLA University of Foreign Lan-
guages) 37(2): 62–68. [王慧兰, 张克亮. (2014). 基于语料库的轻动词结构汉英翻译研
究——以”进行” 类结构为例. hh解放军外国语学院学报ii, 37(2), 62–68.]
Wang, K., and X. Hu. 2008. Jiyu Yuliaoku de Fanyi Hanyu Cihui Tezheng Yanjiu (A parallel
corpus-based study on lexical features of translated Chinese). Zhongguo Fanyi (Chinese
Translators Journal) (6): 16–22. [王克非, 胡显耀. (2008). 基于语料库的翻译汉语词汇特
征研究. hh中国翻译ii, (6), 16–22.]
Wei, Z. 1994. Fanyi Yuyan, Dangdai Hanyu, Fanyi Biaozhun (Translated language, modern
Chinese and translation standards). Lujiang Daxue Xuebao (Journal of Lujiang University)
(2): 49–53. [魏志成. (1994). 翻译语言. 当代汉语. 翻译标准. hh鹭江大学学报ii, (2), 49–53.]
Wei, Z. 1996. Fanyi Yuyan yu Minzu Yuyan: Lun Hanyu Wenxue Yuyan zhong de Fanyi Yuyan
Chengfen (Translated language and national language: On the translational aspects in Chinese
literary language). Lujiang Daxue Xuebao (Journal of Lujiang University) (3): 84–90. [魏志成.
(1996). 翻译语言与民族语言——论汉语文学语言中的翻译语言成分. hh鹭江大学学报ii,
(3), 84–90.]
Wu, G., and K. Wang. 2011. Jiyu Yingyu Leibiyuliaoku de Fanyi Wenben de Dapei Tezheng
Yanjiu (An English comparable corpora-based study of the collocational features in translated
texts). Zhongguo Waiyu (Foreign Languages in China), 8(5): 40–48. [武光军, 王克非. (2011).
基于英语类比语料库的翻译文本的搭配特征研究. hh中国外语ii, 8(5), 40–48.]
Xiang, X. 1993. Jianming Hanyushi Xia (A history of Chinese language, Vol. II). Beijing: Gaodeng
Jiaoyu Chubanshe. [向熹. (1993). hh简明汉语史(下)ii. 北京: 高等教育出版社.]
出版社.]
Xiao, Z., and G. Dai. 2010a. Hanyu Yiwen zhong Xiyu yu Cicu de Shiyong Tezheng: Jiyu
Yuliaoku de Yanjiu (A corpus-based study of idioms and word clusters in translated Chinese).
Waiyu Yanjiu (Foreign Languages Research) (3): 79–86. [肖忠华, 戴光荣. (2010). 汉语译文
中习语与词簇的使用特征: 基于语料库的研究. hh外语研究ii, (3), 79–86.]
Xiao, Z., and G. Dai. 2010b. Xunqiu Disanyuma: Jiyu Hanyu Yiwenyuliaoku de Fanyi Gongxing
and Research) 42(1): 52–58. [肖忠华, 戴光荣. (2010). 寻求”第三语码”: 基于汉语译文语料
Xiao, Z., and G. Dai. 2011. Fanyi Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu de Xinkuangjia (A new framework for
translation studies and teaching: A comprehensive review of corpus-based translation studies).
Waiyu Jiaoxue Lilun yu Shijian (Foreign Language Learning Theory and Practice) (1): 8–15.
[肖忠华, 戴光荣. (2011). 翻译教学与研究的新框架: 语料库翻译学综述. hh外语教学理论
与实践ii, (1), 8–15.]
Xie, Y. 1990. Xiandai Hanyu Ouhua Yufa Gailun (Europeanization of Chinese grammar). Hong
Kong: Guangming Tushu Gongsi. [谢耀基. (1990). hh现代汉语欧化语法概论ii. 香港: 光明图
书公司.]
Xie, Y. 2001. Hanyu Yufa Ouhua Zongshu (A review of Europeanization of Chinese grammar).
Yuwen Yanjiu (Linguistic Research) (1): 17–22. [谢耀基. (2001). 汉语语法欧化综述. hh语文
研究ii, (1), 17–22.]
Xu, J. 2001. Pubianyufa Yuanze yu Hanyu Yufa Xianxiang (Grammatical principles and gram-
matical phenomena). Beijing: Beijing Daxue Chubanshe. [徐杰. (2001). hh普遍语法原则与汉
语语法现象ii. 北京: 北京大学出版社.]
232 References
Xu, J. 2007. Yuyan Guihua yu Yuyan Jiaoyu (Language planning and language education).
Shanghai: Xuelin Chubanshe. [徐杰. (2007). hh语言规划与语言教育ii. 上海: 学林出版社.]
Xu, H. 2010. Xuexizhe Yuliaoku yu Yingyu Xuexixing Cidian Bianzuan (Learner corpus and
learner’s English dictionary compilation). Cishu Yanjiu (Lexicographical Studies) (3): 49–57.
[徐海. (2010). 学习者语料库与英语学习型词典编纂. hh辞书研究ii, (3), 49–57.]
Yin, H. 2007. Xiandai Hanyu Leicizhui Yanjiu (Study on the quasi-affix of modern Chinese)
(Doctoral dissertation). Shandong University. [尹海良. (2007). hh现代汉语类词缀研究 (博
士论文)ii. 山东大学.]
Yu, S., X. Zhu, and H. Duan. 2005. Xiandai Hanyu zhong de Xingshidongci (Dummy verbs in
contemporary Chinese). Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing 10(4):
509–518. [俞士汶, 朱学锋, 段惠明. (2005). 现代汉语中的形式动词. Computational Linguis-
tics and Chinese Language Processing, 10(4), 509–518.]
Yuan, J. 2006. Jindai Xifang Chuanjiaoshi dui Baihuawen de Yingxiang (The influence to
vernacular Chinese by missionaries). Ershiyi Shiji (The 21 Century) (98): 77–86. [袁进.
(2006). 近代西方传教士对白话文的影响. hh二十一世纪ii, (98), 77–86.]
Zhang, Y. 2002. HUA wei Dongci Gongneng Ruohua de Dengji Xulie (Degree sequence of
functional reduction on hua suffix verb). Zhongguo Yuwen (Studies of the Chinese Language)
(1): 50–54. [张云秋. (2002). “化”尾动词功能弱化的等级序列. hh中国语文ii, (1), 50–54.]
Zhang, B. (ed.). 2010. Xiandai Hanyu Miaoxie Yufa (A descriptive grammar of modern Chinese).
Zhang, Y., and Baigangxiuji. 2005. Jiyu Changdu de Kuozhan Fangfa de Hanying Juzi Duiqi
(Aligning sentences in Chinese-English corpora with extended length-based approach). Jour-
nal of Chinese Information Processing 19(5): 31–37. [张艳, 柏冈秀纪. (2005). 基于长度的扩
展方法的汉英句子对齐. hh中文信息学报ii, 19(5), 31–37.]
Zhao, S. 1979. Guanyu ‘SHI. . .De’ Ju (On ‘SHI. . .DE’ structure). Yuyan Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu
(Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies) (1): 57–66. [赵淑华. (1979). 关于 “是. . .. . .
的”句. hh语言教学与研究ii, (1), 57–66.]
Zhao, Q., and K. Wang. 2013. Yingyihan Fanyi Yuyan de Jieduanxing Tedian: Jiyu Lishi
Leibiyuliaoku de Kaocha (Periodicity as a linguistic feature of English-Chinese translations:
A corpora-based comparative study). Zhongguo Fanyi (Chinese Translators Journal) (3):
15–19. [赵秋荣, 王克非. (2013). 英译汉翻译语言的阶段性特点: 基于历时类比语料库的
考察. hh中国翻译ii, (3), 15–19.]
Zhou, G. 1985. Jiayi Buyi (Additional remarks on ‘Jiayi’ structure). Hanyu Xuexi (Chinese
Language Learning) (3): 16–20. [周刚. (1985). “加以”补议. hh汉语学习ii, (3), 16–20.]
Zhou, G. 1987. Xingshi Dongci de Cifenlei (Subcategorization of light verbs). Hanyu Xuexi
(Chinese Language Learning) (1): 11–14. [周刚. (1987). 形式动词的次分类. hh汉语学习ii,
(1), 11–14.]
he Yuyigongneng (Self-reference and other reference: Nominalization markers of DE, ZHE,
SUO, ZHI and their grammatical and semantical functions). Fangyan (Dialect) (1): 16–31. [朱
德熙. (1983). 自指和转指: 汉语名词化标记 “的、者、所、之”的语法功能和语义功能.
hh方言ii, (1), 16–31.]
Zhu, D. 1985. Xiandai Shumianhanyu li de Xuhua Dongci he Mingdongci: Wei Diyijie Guoji
Hanyu Jiaoxue Taolunhui er Zuo (Light verbs and nominalized verbs in modern Chinese).
Beijingdaxue Xuebao (Journal of Beijing University) (5): 1–6. [朱德熙. (1985). 现代书面汉语
里的虚化动词和名动词: 为第一届国际汉语教学讨论会而作. hh北京大学学报ii, (5), 1–6.]
Zhu, D. 1999. Zhu Dexi Wenji Diyijuan: Yufa Jiangyi, Yufawenda, Dingyu he Zhuangyu (The
complete works of Zhu Dexi, Vol. 1: Lectures on grammar, Qs & As to grammar, attributives
and adverbials). Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. [朱德熙. (1999). hh朱德熙文集(第1卷) 语法
讲义、语法答问、定语和状语ii. 北京: 商务印书馆.]
References 233
Zuo, S. 2012. Jiyu Yuliaoku de Hanyuyiwen Tezheng Yanjiu: Tibiaoji Ge’an Tantao (Investigating
the features and tendencies of translated Chinese: A corpus-based case study of aspect
markers, MA Thesis). Zhongnan Daxue (Central South University of China). [左尚君.
(2012). hh基于语料库的汉语译文特征研究: 体标记个案探讨ii(硕士学位论文). 中南大学.]
Fenbuchayi yu Jiedu (Aspect markers in native and translated Chinese: A corpus-based
investigation). Waiguo Yuyan Wenxue (Foreign Languages and Literatures) (3): 181–188.
[左尚君, 戴光荣. (2013). 基于语料库的体标记在汉语母语与汉语译文中的分布差异与解
读. hh外国语言文学ii, (3), 181–188.]

Hybridity in Translated Chinese - A Corpus Analytical Framework

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Hybridity in Translated Chinese - A Corpus Analytical Framework

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hybridity in Translated Chinese - A Corpus Analytical Framework

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

New Frontiers in Translation Studies

Centre for Studies of Translation, Interpreting and Cognition,

ISSN 2197-8689 ISSN 2197-8697 (electronic)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2016940366

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Printed on acid-free paper

This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature

New Frontiers in Translation Studies, as its name suggests, is a Series which

Fujian, China Defeng Li

1. Interview 02: James McGonigal on “Passage/An Pasaiste”. 2016. In The Scottish

Special thanks to my friends such as Song Yuchun from Shaoguan University

4.3 Previous Research on Anglicisms in MWC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

7 Lexical Features of Hybridity in Translated Chinese . . . . . . . . . . . 89

10.5 ‘SHI’ Structure in Parallel Corpora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165

Fig. 1.1 Flowchart of this research . . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . 5

Fig. 7.6 ‘zheng’ (症) in Babel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

Fig. 11.1 classical ‘zhi’ (之) in LCMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178

Table 3.1 Comparison between CTS and CL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Table 8.4 ‘YI GE一个’ collocation in LCMC and ZCTC

ANN Artificial Neural Network

MCCC Macau Comparable Chinese Corpus

Abstract This introduction begins with a definition of ‘Hybridity in Translated

Stigmatised examples of linguistic hybridity are sometimes referred to

1.1 General Background

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016 1

1.2 Specific Background

1.3 Research Questions and Research Methodology

The aim of the present research is to describe a range of hybridity features in

Fig. 1.1 Flowchart of this

Corpora data with software (WordSmith, AntConc,

Statistical analyses and data reports

Examples extraction from corpora; Make sense of

English Original Bilingual Comparable Corpus Chinese Original

Fig. 1.2 Corpora framework for this research

1.4 Organization and Significance of the Research

The book consists of 12 chapters.

Chapter 3 discusses Corpus Translation Studies as a new approach to investi-

Chapter 9 analyses the hybridity features of light verb constructions in translated

Hunston, S. 2002. Corpora in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016 11

This interstitial passage between fixed identifications opens up the possibility of

2.2 Hybridity in Translation

Translations, thanks their hybrid configuration, have “the likelihood of causing

This definition identifies some characteristics of hybridity in translations and

Chan, (2010) divides hybridity into three kinds in translation:

2.3 Occurrence of Hybridity in Translation

Different contextual situations lead to different types of hybridity in translation

are illustrated by the situations in which Europeanized Chinese (see Chap. 4)

2.4 Questions about Hybridity in Translated Languages

Most of the research on hybridity has focused on the discussion of it as a

Parallel Corpus Comparable Corpus

Fig. 2.1 Hybridity in translation

The chapter has offered a general description of hybridity characteristics in trans-

Abstract This chapter introduces the development of corpus translation studies

As a relatively recent discipline, Translation Studies has undergone many changes

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016 21

3.2 Convergence between CL and CTS

Laviosa (1998b: 474) observes that “the corpus-based approach is evolving,