«Equivalence above

Word Level”
Week 5
 ▪ Words mostly do not occur alone, but along with other words
▪ There are restrictions about which words can accompany what
and in what order
!!! ▪ Some of these are strict rules
▪ Some others are mostly lexical patterns
 Why do builders not produce a building or authors not invent a
novel, since they do invent stories and plots? No reason as far as
dictionary definitions of words are concerned. We don’t say it
Collocations because we don’t say it.

(Bolinger and Sears, 1968: 55)

 ▪ Remember: Equivalence at Word level and Lexical Meaning
▪ Presuposed meaning
▪ ‘semantically arbitrary restrictions which do not follow logically
from the propositional meaning of a word’
Collocations ▪ Tendency of certain words to co-occur regularly in a given
language
 ▪ Has sth to do with propositional meaning
e.g.: cheque (bank, write, pay, money, etc.)

▪ but, meaning cannot always account for collocational patterning

Collocations e.g.: pay a visit, make a visit vs. undertake/perform/carry out a visit

▪ words which we might think of as synonyms or near-synonyms will often

have quite different sets of collocates
e.g.: break rules but not break regulations / wasting time but not squandering time
 ▪ When two words collocate, the relationship can hold between
all or several of their various forms
e.g.: achieving aims, aims having been achieved, achievable aims,
and the achievement of an aim

▪ But not always

Collocations e.g.: bending the rules vs. unbendable rules (inflexible rules)

▪ Thus the patterns of collocation are arbitrary and independent

of meaning within and across languages
 ▪ The same degree of mismatch we see in synonyms or near-synonyms
within a language can be seen with equivalents or near-equivalents in
two languages.
▪ deliver a letter
▪ Mektup dağıtmak
▪ deliver a speech/lecture
▪ Konuşma/sunum yapmak,
▪ deliver news
▪ Haber vermek
Collocations ▪ deliver a blow
▪ Yumruk atmak
▪ deliver a verdict
▪ Kararı/hükmü açıklamak
▪ deliver a baby
▪ Bebek doğurmak
 ▪ Languages involve totally different ways of looking at events
e.g.: delivering a woman in Arabic vs. delivering a baby in English

Collocations ▪ Collocations may reflect the culture of the society the language
is spoken in, but they don’t always reflect an inherent order
 ▪ Refers to the set of collocates or words that are associated with
the word in question
Collocational ▪ Some words have a broader range than others
Range e.g.: shrug (shoulder), run (company, business, show, car, nose, wild,
river etc.)
 ▪ Two main factors that can influence the collocational range:
▪ Level of specificity: the more general a word, the broader its
range
e.g.: bury has a much broader collocational range than its
hyponyms (entomb or inter)
bury people, a treasure, your head, face, feelings, and
memories vs. inter people
Cont.’d ▪ Number of senses: the more sense, the broader the range, since
every meaning will have a different set of collocates
run (manage) company, institution, and business
run (operate/provide) service and course.
! there is a strong relationship between the number of senses a word
has and its collocational range
 ▪ We view collocation as typical or untypical, but not as
admissible or inadmissible

▪ New collocations can be and are often made

▪ Marked collocations: deliberate confusion of collocational

Marked ranges to create new images that challenge the reader/hearer –

often used in fiction, poetry, humor, advertisements
Collocations e.g.: Could peace break out after all?

Normally peace prevails and war breaks out. The deliberate

mixing of collocational ranges in the above extract conveys the
unexpected image of peace being an abnormal, temporary, and possibly
even an undesirable situation.
 What do we need to know as translators of a specific field? Is it
enough to rely on our knowledge of our native tongue to decide
whether or not a collocation is typical?

▪ Being a native speaker of a language does not automatically

Question mean that the translator can assess the acceptability or typicality
of register-specific collocations. (Courses in
specialized/technical language)
 ▪ Collocational patterns are not always typical/untypical in
relation to the language system as a whole.

▪ Some collocations may seem untypical in everyday language

but are common in specific registers.
Collocation ▪ biased error and tolerable error in statistics

and Register ▪ not all unfamiliar collocations are marked

▪ Register specific collocations
▪ data may be handled, extracted, processed, manipulated, and
retrieved, but not typically shifted, treated, arranged, or tackled.
 ▪ We mostly think about the most common collocations of the
word to decide on its meaning

▪ The meaning changes when we think of more rare collocations

Collocational ▪ Taking account of collocational meaning rather than
Meaning substituting individual words with their dictionary equivalents
is therefore crucial at the first stage of translation, that is when
the translator is interpreting the source text.
 ▪ What can be an equivalent for dry in Turkish?
▪ dry cow
▪ dry bread
▪ dry toast
▪ dry wine
▪ dry sound
Collocational
▪ dry voice
Meaning ▪ dry country/state
▪ dry river
▪ dry book
▪ dry humour
▪ dry run
Pitfalls and Problems
▪ Collocation related pitfalls and problems
▪ Using the ST pattern in the TT
▪ Misinterpreting the meaning of a SL collocation
due to interference from the translator’s native
language
▪ Tension between accuracy and naturalness
▪ Culture specific collocations
▪ Marked collocations in the source text