Lecture 3.

Text typology
Текстві категорії і процес перекладу: когезія, когерентність, інтенційність,
інформативність, ситуаційність, прийнятність, інтерсеміотичність.
1. General classification of types of texts
2. Text, discource and genre
3. Text typology in Translation Studies

1. General classification of types of texts

(http://explainwell.org/index.php/table-of-contents-synthesize-text/types-of-
texts/)
A text is a piece of writing that you read or create.
The type or the characteristics of a text are very important for any work of
summarisation on it. It is easier to select the main ideas from certain types of texts, as
the narrative ones (texts “telling a story”) then from others, such as expository texts
(texts “speaking about”).
The type of a texts depend on their purpose, structure and language features.
One of the most commonly used classification text materials is that one based on
text’s purpose and meaning. In this classification, there are three main categories:
1. Expository texts
2. Narrative texts
3. Argumentative texts
An expository text is intended to identify and characterise experiences, facts,
situations, and actions in either abstract or real elements. Expository texts are meant
to explain, inform or describe and they are the most frequently use to write
structures. Expository structures can be classified into five categories:
 description, where the author describes a topics characteristics, features,
attributes, etc. and gives examples.
 procedure or sequence: the author lists different activities in their
chronological order or enumerates items in a numerical order.

1
  comparison: the author explains how two or more objects, events, experiences,
are alike and/or different.
 cause-effect explanation: the author presents ideas, events in time, or facts as
causes and the resulting effect(s) in time.
 problem-solution presentation: the author describes a problem and gives one
or more solutions to the problem.
In the expository category, the non-fictional texts have specific role to inform or to
teach the readers. They can come in a various formats, depending of the area of use:
 business: reports, letters, executive summaries.
 journalism: essays, news reports, press releases, sports news.
 technical communication: user guides, technical reports or standards.
 academic and scientific communication: textbooks, student guides, scientific
reports, scientific journals’ articles, encyclopedia articles.
 general reference works: encyclopedia articles, or on-line, multi-domain
informative texts, as the Wikipedia articles.
A narrative text entertains, instructs or informs readers by telling a story.
Narrative texts deal with imaginary or real world and can be fictional (fairy tales,
novels, science fiction, horror or adventure stories, fables, myths, legends, etc.) and
non-fictional (articles, newspaper reports, historical writings).
Argumentative texts aim is to change the readers’ beliefs. They often contain
negative qualities or characteristics of something/someone, or try to persuade their
readers that an object, product, idea is in some way better than others.
You should note that few texts are purely one type: expository or argumentative
texts can contain narration or evaluative elements.
Remember that the text types refer to the meaning the writing, and they should not be
confused with writing (or other materials) formats: book, article, letter, report,
essay, etc.

https://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/node/121.html

2
The notion of text type is an abstract category designed to characterize the main
structure of a particular text or one of its parts according to its dominant properties. It
is intended to integrate common features of historically varying genres (novella,
novel, short story, etc.) and thus to reduce the complexity of the many overlapping
kinds of texts to distinct textual phenomena. In virtue of narratology’s traditional
focus on time, these phenomena are semantic properties that constitute the temporal
character of the text (passage). Thus, the text type ‘narrative’ is defined by the
property ‘change of state’ of concrete objects and the text type ‘description’,
accordingly, by the property ‘is about states’ of concrete objects. The text type
‘argument’ is defined by logical-semantic relations between abstract objects instead
of temporal-semantic properties. There are many other typologies of text types, often
including more types. But for the sake of consistency, the following account will be
restricted to these three. One requirement of the notion is that the various text types
be mutually exclusive.
The term ‘modes (or types) of discourse’, sometimes used synonymously with ‘text
type’, could be restricted to the characterization of texts according to pragmatic
properties (e.g. the speaker’s purpose). Thus any text may be used to persuade
somebody. Its mode of discourse is then persuasive, even though the text type being
used may vary (Virtanen 1992). The most appropriate text type in this case (or the
text type most often used in connection with the purpose to persuade) may be the text
type ‘argument’. But it need not be. The persuasive mode of discourse can be
instantiated by any text type, depending on pragmatic concerns. The notion ‘mode of
discourse’ is thus context-sensitive; that of ‘text type’ is not.
Another category that is closely related to the notion of text type is ‘genre’. However,
text type and genre should be kept strictly apart from each other as well. Unlike the
numerous historically generated subclasses of genre (such as novel, sonnet, recipe,
homepage) that have evolved by chance, typologies of text type include a limited
number of different items and aim at a complete set of all possible types that can
make up any text. Moreover, in contrast to genre, whose members are, by definition,
entire texts, single text types mainly refer to parts of texts depending on whether the

3
passage exhibits the semantic profile in question or not. As a rule, the definition of
text types is based on text-internal data whereas definitions of (non-literary) genres
follow various text-external and text-internal criteria alike (consider the letter and its
many subclasses).
One important consequence that follows from this definition is that narrative as a
genre is distinguished from the text type ‘narrative’. The text type ‘narrative’ derives
from the prevailing quality of texts considered to be prototypical for the genre
narrative or fiction, members of which are often not pure narratives in the sense of
text type. While any text that is called, say, a novel belongs to the genre narrative,
probably no novel is contains only the text type ‘narrative’. Usually, novels exhibit
all text types. However, any experimental literary text that is called a novel belongs
to the genre narrative, even if it is mainly characterized by the text type ‘description’.
The problem of equivocation (one term denoting different notions) occurs in every
case. This can be avoided when another term is available: thus the term ‘ekphrasis’
denotes a descriptive genre whereas ‘description’ denotes the text type usually
dominating ekphrasis. Yet ‘description’ is by no means restricted to this latter use,
and the term ‘ekphrasis’ mainly refers to literary descriptions depicting pieces of
visual art (Henkel 1997; Klarer 2005).

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/18326103.pdf

There has been a long debate within the field of translation studies about whether it is
possible to classify texts and whether such a classification is useful for practising
translators.
As Hatim and Munday (2004:285) remark, there are two major problems related to
the kind of text typologies currently available.
First of all, the very notion of text type is so broad that it can comprise a large
number of text-fonn variants. For instance, texts as varied as legal acts, technical

4
instructions, sermons, political speeches and advertisements can all be included in the
text type “instruction” (Zydatiss 1983).
The second substantial difficulty related to text typologies is the issue of
hybridisation, that is the fact that a certain text often includes several different types.
Nevertheless, text typologies and their role indentifying the text purpose and function
as well as the author's intention are still perceived as valuable tools for translators,
enabling them to establish the appropriate hierarchy of equivalence levels and choose
such strategies that would best serve to preserve the given purpose, function and
intention

Translation is a very broad, complex and multi-faceted phenomenon, encompassing

much more factors than it seems at first glance.
It is not just copying the words from the original work while changing the language,
but it consists of a careful selection of appropriate phrases and expressions,
combining them together in a skillful way while taking into consideration numerous
aspects, one of them being the text type.
The purpose of this lecture is, therefore, to present various text typologies and text
types, specify their implications for translators and determine the role of the correct
recognition of text type in producing a successful translation. This will be done on the
assumption that a text type is one of the basic factors that allow the translator to
recognise the function and purpose of the text as well as the author's intention.
Thus, depending on the nature of these, the translator will inevitably resort to
different techniques and strategies in order to successfully render the source text.
Therefore, identifying the text type also helps the translator to select the appropriate
translation strategy.
In order to discuss the notion of text typology, it is necessary to differentiate between
three other terms which are incorporated into its definition, namely: text, discourse
and genre.

5
According to Tomaszkiewicz (2006:112), text typology (Polish: typologia tekstow) is
understood as a certain system of classifying texts on the basis of the field they
belong to, their genre and purpose as well as the type of discourse.

TEXT
The notion of text may be defined form various points of view. It may be perceived,
for instance, as an organised whole that meets seven standards of textuality, that is:
cohesion, coherence, intentionality, acceptability, informativity, situationality and
intertextuality (Beaugrande, Dressier 1990:58);
as an orderly sequence of linguistic elements which can altogether perform a
communicative function (Dobrzyriska 1993:287);
as a basic unit of linguistic communication (Gajda 1992:9);
as an integrated whole of semiotic character, having a beginning and an end, and
conveying information that is complete form the sender's point of view (Mayenowa
1976:291-296).
Tomaszkiewicz (2006:96) defines text as a linguistic object of various length, that
creates a semantic whole.
As Dambska-Prokop (2000:230) points out, the very definition of text is determined
by whether the utterance or communicative act is taken as a point of reference. In the
former case, text is understood as a sequence of sentences which form a cohesive
whole. Cohesion is achieved by means of connectors, specific word order, repetitions,
etc., and is the basic criterion of textuality, that is the fact that a given series of
sentences can be called a text.
However, as Dambska-Prokop (2000:230) observes, linguistic ways of expressing
cohesion constitute only apart of cohesive mechanisms. This is because a text is more
than only a semantic-syntactic structure. It has got a sender and an addressee as well
as certain aims to fulfil. Text may also be defined as a certain communicative action
o f a complex structure that functions in a specific semantic space and is to fulfil
specificfunctions, fo r instance: informative, esthetic, pragmatic function, etc.
(Damska- Prokop 2000:230). It is this function that determines the text's

6
characteristic features. Therefore, according to this definition, a text is perceived not
only as a result of a certain effort of the sender, but also, and above all, as a product
that is able to fulfil its communicative function in the process of the appropriate
interpretation by a reader.

DISCOURCE
As regards the notion of discourse, it is a sequence o f linguistic signs that are
organised according to the rules of a given language and representing what the sender
wishes to communicate to the addressee (Tomaszkiewicz 2006:35).
Discourse entails a certain interaction between two participants in the communicative
act (the sender and the recipient) under specific spatial and temporal circumstances
and with a certain purpose. An oral discourse necessitates the (visual and auditory)
co-presence of the sender and the addressee. In the case of written discourse the
production and reception acts take place in different spatial and temporal situations.
The term discourse can also be understood as a certain linguistic activity undertaken
by the language users in a particular context (Maingueneau 1996:28); as a sequence
of actions whose form is determined by who says what to whom, in what situation
and with what purpose (Grabias 1997:264-265); or as a certain norm and strategy in
the process of constructing a text and utterance which is based on specific social and
cultural patterns that comprise this norm (Labocha 1996:51).
Therefore, the notion of discourse seems to be broader than the term text since the
latter is understood as a linguistic whole, expressed orally or in writing, which does
not depend on the context, whereas discourse is related to a specific pragmatic
situation, thus comprising both text and context (Maingueneau 1996:83). However, as
Dambska-Prokop notices (2000:64), when text is perceived as a product of a certain
process which has got its own structure, then discourse is a dynamic term and refers
to an individual process of text production and comprehension, a text functioning
inacertainpragmatic situation. Discourse is also a superordinate term for various text
types.

7
However, if textis understood as arecord of some communicative event determined
by the author's intention and sociocultural conditions in which it is produced, then
this text is identified with discourse.
One of the most significant aspects for translation theory is that discourse,
understood as a "text in context”, functions in a certain pragmatic situation.
Therefore, while undertaking discourse analysis in translation process, the translator
needs to determine the conditions of linguistic communication, the roles of the
participants in the communication as well as the ways in which the participants
manifest their presence.

GENRE
As regards the last of the three notions, namely genre, it is described by Trosborg
(1997:6) as text category readily distinguished by mature speakers o fa language (...)
According to Miller (1985:151), a rhetorically sound definition of genre must be
centred not on the substance or form of the discourse buton the action it is used to
accomplish. Genre can be recognised as a system for achieving social purposes by
verbal means. Therefore, for instance guidebooks, poems, business letters, newspaper
articles can be referred to as genres because they are used in a particular situation for
a particular purpose.The notion of genre refers to completed texts. However,
communicative function and text type, which constitute text properties, cut across
genres. Hence, informative texts include newspaper reports, textbooks, TV news, etc.,
argumentative texts - debates, newspaper articles, political speeches, etc. (Trosborg
1997:12). Texts which are linguistically distinct within a genre may represent
different text types, whereas linguistically similar texts belonging to different genres
may represent a single text type. Therefore, prior to discussing text typology and its
role in translation, it is worth explaining what a text type actually is.

8
 Text types
According to Neubert (1985:125), text types are socially effective, efficient, and
appropriate moidds into which the linguistic material availablein the system o f a
language is recast (Neubert 1985, cited after Sager 1997:31) Sager (1997:30) remarks
that text types developed as patterns of messages for certain communicative
situations. When writing a specific message, a person first of all thinks about the text
type that would be appropriate for the given occasion as well as for the content of the
message, and only then formulates the message itself. Repetitions of messages in
certain circumstances have created particular expectations and conventions of what is
appropriate for the given occasion. However, the notion of a text type is more
complex than that. Whereas the majority of people associate a text type with a certain
content, for instance film review, police report, recipe, it frequently happens that the
same content may permit a variety of text types.Sager (1997:31) concludes that text
types have evolved from conventionalised communicative situations. As a result of
this and since they arise from common relationships between the author and the
reader, they are capable of conveying messages unambiguously. Their other
characteristic features are topic and mode of expression.According to the framework
associated with Aristotle and Biihler, a text can be classified into a particular type
according to which of the four components in the communication process receives
the primary focus: speaker, listener, thing referred to or the linguistic material
(Trosborg 1997:13). If the main focus is on the speaker (sender), the text will be
expressive; if on the listener (receiver), it will be persuasive; if on the linguistic code,
it will be literary; and if the aim is to represent the realities of the world, it will be
referential.A particular text type determines the reader's reaction to a message. The
reader recognises the text type through the situation and the features of the text's
composition. The text type also informs them about the author and his/ her intention.
Readers' responses to a text may be twofold. They are either directly addressed by the
author of the text and hence they must receive the text in relation to their own
individual background. However, if they are not regarded as personal messages, the
text becomes only an item of writing which may be re-used by a different author and

9
a different reader (Sager 1997:32).However, as pointed out by Trosborg (1997:14),
real texts usually display features of more than one type, thus being multifunctional.
Therefore, text typology needs to account for this diversity (Hatim and Mason
1990:138). Inmany cases one of the aims is the dominant one and the other is a
means, for instance information included in the advertisement in order to further the
persuasion.Hatim and Mason (1990:140), therefore, defined text types as a
conceptualframework which enables us to classify texts in terms o f
communicativeintentions serving an overall rhetorical purpose. For translation
purposes they adopted Werlich's (1976) typology which comprises five text types:
description, narration, exposition, argumentation and instruction, with the latter
category being divided into two classes: instruction with option (advertisements,
manuals, etc.) and instruction without option (legislative texts, contracts). This
typology is based on cognitive properties of text types: differentiation and
interrelation of perceptions in space (description), differentiation and interrelation of
perception in time (narration), comprehension of general concepts by analysis and/or
synthesis (exposition), evaluation of relations between the concepts by extracting
similarities and contrasts (argumentation), planning of future behaviour (instruction)
(Trosborg 1997:15-16).However, as Trosborg (1997:16) points out, most discourse
employs multiple views of reality, therefore encompassing more than only one type.
She observes that pure narration, description, exposition and argumentation rarely
occur. Therefore, a certain genre may employ several text types (also referred to as
modes of presentation), but usually one of them is identified as the dominant type.
Hence, she suggests that a two-level typology of text types is needed: text type at a
macro level, that is the dominant function of a text type exhibited in or underlying a
text, and microlevel text types that result from the process of textualisation
determined by the producer's strategy. For instance, an argumentative text type may
be realised by means of narration, instructions - by description, etc. However, a
dominant text type is usually recognisable. Hatim and Mason (1990:146-148) account
for the existence of blends of various text types, which they refer to as
"hybridisation'’, emphasising the need for translators to be aware of this

10
phenomenon.On the other hand, according to Kussmaul (1997:69), the notion of text
typeis ambiguous as it can refer both to the idea of Texttyp within which Reiss (1971)
distinguished several types (informative, expressive, appellative), and to what is
called in German Textsorte, referring, for instance, to manuals, business letters,
weather reports, contracts, etc.However, similarly as Sager (1997), also Kussmaul
(1997) agrees that there is a direct relationship between situation and text type.
Kussmaul refers to the model of situational dimension proposed by Crystal and Davy
(1969) in which the following dimensions have been distinguished: individuality,
dialect, time,medium, participation, province, status, modality and singularity. All
these dimensions affect the way a given text is written or spoken. This model has
been applied to translation by House (1977). As regards the medium, it could be
either speech or writing; with participation, it might be a dialogue or a monologue,
the status may be for instance equal-to-equal, higher-to-lower; whereas province is a
particular field that the text is related to. The change made to any of these dimensions
results in another text type.In his consideration about the text types, Sager (1997:28)
provides the distinction between a primary and secondary reader saying that this
distinction is of particular importance for translation since it is related to the
difference between message and text. He defines the primary reader as the person a
writer has in mind when producing a message (ibidem). Therefore, all other readers,
that is those not included in the writer's initial range of addressees, are secondary
readers. Communication between the author and the addressee is most effective when
the writer's presuppositions concerning the reader's expectations match the reader's
assumptions regarding the writer's intention. However, most translation recipients are
secondary readers and they become primary readers only if the authors address them
directly and this address it retained by the translator. Therefore, for secondary readers
the writer's influence on the success of the communication decreases while the
translator's role grows in importance because it is now his/her task to interpret and
match both the readers' expectations and the author's intention.As regards the primary
and secondary readership, the translators perform both these functions, adopting one
or the other according to the stage of the translation process. When translators read

11
the text in order to determine and comprehend its content and the author's intended
message, they are primary readers. However, when translating, they are both the
writers and the initial recipients of the target texts, hence they adopt the role of
secondary readers.Because the correct identification of a text type helps the translator
to specify the text's function, the author's intention and the reader's expectations, it is
worth looking at some of the ways of classifying text types, i.e. text typologies.
Text typologies
As Kozlowska (2007:26) notices, despite the fact that text typology is a very
significant issue for a translator, it is often neglected by specialist literature concerned
with translation studies. This might be the case because of the existence of multiple
text typologies based on various criteria as well as the fact that a text rarely displays
features of only one particular type. There have also been some doubts as to the
feasibility of classifying texts and its usefulness for practising translators (Hatim and
Munday 2004:285).Because the text is subject of research for many different fields of
study, for instance literature, linguistics or translation studies, there are various
criteria for text typologies. According to Kozlowska (2007:25), there are two major
approaches to the issue of text typology: general one (based on general criteria) and
translational one (based on the translation-oriented criteria).Tezaurus terminologii
translatorycznej edited by Lukszyn (1993:326- 334) contains forty-two entries with
the notion "text”. After removing the synonymous ones, there are roughly twenty-five
types of texts, for instance: operative text, artistic text, expressive text, informative
text, complex text, literary text, technical text, scientific text, nonliterary text, poetic
text, popular science text, journalistic text, official text. It seems that such a division
substantially complicates the issue of text typology. Different scholars suggest
various typologies on the basis of certain selected criteria. For instance, in the Polish
edition of the French dictionary Terminologiede la traduction edited by Delisle
(1999) - Terminologia Tlumaczenia, texts can be divided into various categories,
depending on particular criteria. According to the field of study they refer to, there
are for instance: biblical texts, legal texts, journalistic texts, scientific texts, literary
texts. Texts may be also divided according to their communicative aims (for instance

12
persuading, informing, arguing, etc.) or according to the type of discourse (narrative
texts, descriptive texts, dialogic texts).However, this is not the only available
typology. Maingueneau (1996:85) mentions three kinds of text typologies: based on
the situation in which the text is uttered (that is the relationship between the
participants in the communicative act and the time and place of its utterance);
communicative typologies (function- oriented); and typologies that take into
consideration the social sphere the text is related to (for instance: school, family,
etc).Sager (1997:32) distinguishes between the texts that convey the author's
intentions (here the translator's task is to, first of all, render the author's thoughts) and
texts whose main function is to meet the recipients' expectations (the translator
adjusts the translation to the target language addressee).For Delisle ( 1993:47, after
Kozlowska 2007:25), the assumed criteria used in text typology are: the field of study
the text is related to; the character of the text; and the purpose of the text. On their
basis he differentiated between: a) literary, biblical and legal texts; b) reports,
prefaces, school books, tourist booklets, novels and short stories; c) descriptive,
narrative and argumentative texts.However, the text typology most widely used in
translation theory is the one proposed by Reiss (1976:10) on the basis of the Karl
Bühler's concept of language functions. This typology divides texts into: informative
(informative Texttyp -inhaltsbetont) - information-oriented texts where the content is
of paramount importance, the main task for a translator of such a text is to correctly
convey all the facts (for instance: instruction manual, report, essay, leaflet);
expressive(expresive Texttyp - formbetont) - recipient-oriented texts where the
translator needsto re-create the form (novel, short story, poetry, drama, biography);
operative(operative Texttyp - appelbetont) - texts oriented towards certain values and
behaviour patterns, they are to affect people's opinions, behaviour and elicit certain
reactions, in the case of such texts the translator often resorts to their adaptation to the
target language recipients (advertisement, satire). Therefore, these three types of text
are distinguished one form the other by means of such factors as the intention (also
referred to as "rhetorical purpose”) of the text's producer and the function that the text
is supposed to serve (Hatim and Munday 2004:281).The text typology suggested by

13
Reiss was originally intended as a set of guidelines for practising translators. It was
also used to establish a correlation between text type and translation method as it has
been claimed that the type of text corresponds to the demands made on the translator.
It has also been suggested that the main function of the source text needs to be
preserved in the translation. Therefore, in the case of informative texts, the translators
should first of all aim at achieving semantic equivalence and only then focus on
connotative meanings and esthetic values (Hatim and Munday 2004:284). As regards
expressive texts, the translators should preserve esthetic effect as well as important
elements of semantic content, whereas in operative texts, the translator needs to
successfully render the extra-linguistic effect the text is supposed to produce (for
instance persuasiveness), which is usually achieved at the expense of both form and
content (ibidem). Therefore, a translation can be deemed successful if: in an
informative text it provides direct and full access to the conceptual content of the
source language text; in an expressive text it transmits a direct impression of the
artistic form of the conceptual content; in an operative text it produces a text from
which it will directly elicit the desired response (Reiss 1989:106). However, Reiss
also points out that a translator needs to bear in mind that there are also compound
types in which the three communicative functions mentioned (transmission of
information, creatively expressed content and impulses to action) are all present like
for instance in a didactic poem or satirical novel (ibidem). The translator's task is
therefore to identify the predominant function and choose the translation strategy
accordingly. For instance, metaphors in predominantly expressive texts should be
rendered metaphorically, whereas in predominantly informative texts they may be
modified or even omitted altogether (Reiss, 1971:62, after Hatim and Munday
2004:73-74). As all texts are a sort of hybrid, this predominance of a certain
rhetorical purpose in a specific text plays a crucial role in assessing the text type
"identity” (Hatim and Munday 2004:74).

14
TEXT TYPOLOGY AND TRANSLATION These standards of textuality have
formed the basis of a number of text typologies in current use within translation
studies. We have already alluded to one of the earlier text classifications, the one
proposed by translation theorist Katherina Reiss (1976). In this typology, informative,
expressive and operative intentions (or rhetorical purposes) and functions (or the uses
to which texts are put), are said to have a direct consequence for the kind of semantic,
syntactic and stylistic features used and for the way texts are structured, both in their
original form and in the translation. Furthermore, Reiss posits a correlation between a
given text type and translation method, to ensure that the predominant function of the
text is preserved in translation. Thus, what the translator must do in the case of
informative texts is to concentrate on establishing semantic equivalence and,
secondarily, on connotative meanings and aesthetic values. In the case of expressive
texts, the main concern of the translator should be to try and preserve aesthetic effects
alongside relevant aspects of the semantic content. Finally, operative texts require the
translator 44 TRANSLATING TEXT IN CONTEXT to heed the extralinguistic
effect which the text is intended to achieve, even if this has to be undertaken at the
expense of both form and content. Another influential text classification is the one
originally proposed by Werlich (1976) and subsequently developed and used by a
number of translation scholars as the cornerstone of context-sensitive models of
translation (e.g. Hatim and Mason 1990). This text typology has certainly avoided the
pitfalls of text categorization suffered by earlier approaches, which lean heavily
towards the strict end of objective criteria for assessing translation quality. As an
approach to translation, Hatim and Mason’s (1990) text type model is underpinned by
the idea of ‘predominant contextual focus’ and thus confronts boldly the issue of ‘text
hybridization’ being the norm rather than the exception. With the emphasis on
contextual focus, the multifunctionality of all texts is no longer seen as a weakness in
text classification, nor indeed as a licence for an ‘anything goes’ attitude in the
production or analysis of texts or translations. For example, it is recognized that,

15
while a distinction may usefully be made between ‘expressive’ texts and
‘informative’ texts, texts are rarely if ever one or the other type, purely and simply.
On the other hand, it is equally important to recognize that, unless there is a good
reason to do otherwise, metaphors in predominantly expressive texts are best
rendered metaphorically, while those encountered in predominantly informative texts
can be modified or altogether jettisoned, with no detrimental effect on the overall
function of the text in translation (Reiss 1971: 62).

SELF-CHECK SECTION

COHERENCE Coherence refers to the accessibility,

relevance and logic of the concepts and
relations underlying the surface texture of
a text. It is thus a psychological concept,

16
 but to some extent it is produced by and
depends on the textual cohesion of the
text. See also Fidelity 3.

(JM) FURTHER READING: Beaugrande

and Dressler (1981); Blum-Kulka
(1986/2004).
COHESION Part of the textual function of language,
cohesion covers ‘relations of meaning
that exist within a text’ (Halliday and
Hasan 1976: 4). A single instance of
cohesion is termed a ‘tie’, and, in
Halliday and Hasan’s seminal model,
there are five types: (1) reference
(pronouns such as she, our,
demonstratives such as this, comparatives
such as the same); (2) substitution and
ellipsis; (3) conjunction (and, but, etc.);
(4) collocation; and (5) lexical cohesion
(repetition, synonymy and the use of
words related in a lexical field). Such
textual devices enable a text to hold
together linguistically and contribute to
the maintenance of coherence. In a well-
known study of cohesion and coherence
in translation, Blum-Kulka (1986/2004)
demonstrates how changes in cohesion
cause functional shifts in TTs.

(JM) FURTHER READING: Beaugrande

17
 and Dressler (1981); Blum-Kulka (1986/
2004); Halliday and Hasan (1976);
Halliday and Matthiessen (2004); Hoey
(2005).
COLLOCATION The phenomenon of co-occurrence of two
lexical items, known as ‘collocates’ (e.g.
held our breath; human being; in winter;
wage war). Collocation is a major
building block of lexical and syntactic
structure. It shows the paradigmatic axis
of language and is a category of cohesion.
It may be calculated statistically using
electronic corpora (Sinclair 1991; Church
et al. 1991) or psychologically (Halliday
and Hasan 1976; Partington 1998). Hoey
(2005: 5) defines it as ‘a psychological
association between words (rather than
lemmas) up to four words apart and …
evidenced by their occurrence together in
corpora more often than is explicable in
terms of random distribution’. Incorrect
or unusual collocation (e.g. sustained our
breath) often occurs in the speech of
language learners and may be a feature of
translationese.

(JM) FURTHER READING: Halliday

and Hasan (1976); Hoey (2005);
Partington (1998); Sinclair (1991).

18
References
Dobrzynska, T. 1993. „Tekst” [in:] J. Bartminski, (ed.). Encyklopedia
kidturypolskiejXXwieku.Vol. 2. Wroclaw: Wiedza o Kulturze.
Hatim, B., Mason, I. 1990. Discourse and the Translator London/New York:
Longman.
Hatim, B., Munday, J. 2004. Translation. An advanced resource book. London and
New York: Routledge.
Kussmaul, P. 1997. “Text Type Conventions and Translating: Some Methodological
Issues” [in:] A. Trosborg, (ed.). Text typology and translation.
Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 67-83.
Reiss, K 1989. “Text Types, Translation Types and Translation Assessment”. Trans,
by Andrew Chestennan, (ed.)., pp. 105-115.
Sager, J.C. 1997. “Text Types and Translation” [in:] A. Trosborg, (ed.). Text
Typology and Translation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing
Company, pp. 25-41.
Trosborg, A. 1997. “Text Typology: Register, Genre and Text Type” [in:] A.
Trosborg, (ed.). TextTypology> and Translation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John
Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 3-23.
Zydatiss, W. 1983. “Text Typologies and Translation” [in:] The Incorporated
Linguist22.4, pp.
Abbott, H. Porter (2011). “Time, Narrative, Life, Death, & Text-Type Distinctions:
The Example of Coetzee’s Diary of a Bad Year.” Narrative 19.2, 187–200.

19