Discourse Markers Across Languages: A Contrastive Study of Second-level Discourse Markers in Native and Non-native Text With Implications for General and Pedagogic Lexicography

cover next page > Cover title: author: publisher: isbn10 | asin: print isbn13: ebook isbn13: language: subject publi...

Author: Siepmann Dirk

30 downloads 745 Views 2MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

cover

next page >

Cover

title:

author: publisher: isbn10 | asin: print isbn13: ebook isbn13: language: subject publication date: lcc: ddc: subject:

Discourse Markers Across Languages : A Contrastive Study of Second-level Discourse Markers in Native and Non-native Text With Implications for General and Pedagogic Lexicography Routledge Advances in Corpus Linguistics ; 6 Siepmann, Dirk. Taylor & Francis Routledge 0415349494 9780415349499 9780203315262 English Discourse markers, Contrastive linguistics, Lexicography, Language and languages--Study and teaching. 2005 P302.35.S54 2005eb 401/.41 Discourse markers, Contrastive linguistics, Lexicography, Language and languages--Study and teaching.

cover

next page >

< previous page

page_i

next page >

Page i Discourse Markers Across Languages This book deals with ready-made phrases, or ‘second-level discourse markers’ such as it is argued that or the same goes for . Specifically the book answers questions such as ‘how can such phrases be defined or translated?’ or ‘how can they be recorded in dictionaries?’ The book falls into two parts. Part I presents a functional taxonomy of second-level markers in English, French and German as well as an analysis of their use in continuous text. Part II offers a contrastive interlanguage analysis of the performance of non-native writers and translators. The book is essential reading for professional linguists or lexicographers with an interest in collocation and phraseology, as well as for academics, translators and language teachers seeking to produce well-crafted text in a foreign language. Dirk Siepmann is Lecturer in English at Siegen University, Germany.

< previous page

page_i

next page >

< previous page

page_ii

next page >

Page ii Routledge advances in corpus linguistics Edited by Anthony McEnery, Lancaster University, UK, and Michael Hoey, Liverpool University, UK. Corpus-based linguistics is a dynamic area of linguistic research. The series aims to reflect the diversity of approaches to the subject, and thus to provide a forum for debate and detailed discussion of the various ways of building, exploiting and theorizing about the use of corpora in language studies. 1. Swearing in English Anthony McEnery 2. Antonymy A corpus-based perspective Steυen Jones 3. Modelling Variation in Spoken and Written English Daυid Y.W.Lee 4. The Linguistics of Political Argument The spin-doctor and the wolf-pack at the White House Alan Partington 5. Corpus Stylistics Speech, writing and thought presentation in a corpus of English writing Elena Semino and Mick Short 6. Discourse Markers Across Languages A contrastive study of second-level discourse markers in native and non-native text with implications for general and pedagogic lexicography Dirk Siepmann

< previous page

page_ii

next page >

< previous page

page_iii

next page >

Page iii Discourse Markers Across Languages A contrastive study of second-level discourse markers in native and non-native text with implications for general and pedagogic lexicography Dirk Siepmann LONDON AND NEW YORK

< previous page

page_iii

next page >

< previous page

page_iv

next page >

Page iv First published 2005 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 270 Madison Ave, New York, NY 10016 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005. To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk. © 2005 Dirk Siepmann All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data A catalog record for this book has been requested ISBN 0-203-31526-X Master e-book ISBN ISBN 0-415-34949-4 (Print Edition)

< previous page

page_iv

next page >

< previous page

page_v

next page >

Page v Unter Südländern ist die Sprache ein Ingredienz der Lebensfreude, dem man weit lebhaftere gesellschaftliche Schätzung entgegenbringt, als der Norden sie kennt. Es sind vorbildliche Ehren, in denen das nationale Bindemittel der Muttersprache bei diesen Völkern steht, und etwas heiter Vorbildliches hat die genußreiche Ehrfurcht, mit der man ihre Formen und Lautgesetze betreut. Man spricht mit Vergnügen, man hört mit Vergnügen—und man hört mit Urteil…* Thomas Mann, Mario und der Zauberer Mache die Dinge so einfach wie möglich—aber nicht einfacher† Albert Einstein Il faut…ramener la linguistique vers le lexique où la complexité des langues parvient à son plus haut degré de force et d’épanouissement‡ Harald Weinrich, Le Français dans le Monde (303) * ‘Among southern peoples language is an ingredient of life’s joys which is held in much livelier social esteem than in the north. The honours paid by these nations to that national binder, the mother tongue, are exemplary, and there is something joyfully exemplary about the appreciation and awe with which they treat its forms and sounds. One speaks with pleasure, one listens with pleasure—and one listens with discernment.’ (my translation) † ‘Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.’ (my translation) ‡ ‘Linguistics has to be steered back towards the area of lexis, where language attains its highest degree of expressiveness and complexity.’ (my translation)

< previous page

page_v

next page >

< previous page

page_vi

next page >

page_vi

next page >

Page vi This page intentionally left blank.

< previous page

< previous page

page_vii

next page >

Page vii Contents

Preface What this book is about Acknowledgements

ix xii xiii

PART I Linguistic considerations

1

1 Observing languages: introduction to Part I 1.1 Aims, scope and methodology 1.2 Corpora and corpus-enquiry tools 2 Investigating routines: defining and describing multi-word discourse markers 2.1 Pragmatic perspectives on discourse markers 2.2 Lexicological perspectives on multi-word discourse markers 2.3 Syntactic realizations of SLDMs 3 Identifying meanings and functions: an attempt at a functional taxonomy of SLDMs 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Language functions and textual relations 3.3 A taxonomy of SLDMs 3.4 Points of interest 4 Straddling cultures: three types of second-level discourse markers in contrastive perspective 4.1 Exemplifiers 4.2 Reformulators and resumers 4.3 Inferrers 4.4 Summary and conclusion

< previous page

page_vii

3 3 22 34 37 45 52 82 82 82 87 98 106 111 141 219 239

next page >

< previous page

page_viii

next page >

Page viii PART II A contrastive interlanguage analysis with implications for dictionary making

241

1 Introduction 2 Facing realities: the performance of non-native writers and translators 2.1 Interlanguage analysis 2.2 German writers’ performance in the field of discourse markers 2.3 Translations under the spotlight 2.4 Conclusion 3 Lexicographic treatment of SLDMs 3.1 Lexicographic coverage of SLDMs 3.2 Macrostructural and microstructural treatment of SLDMs 3.3 Sample entries 4 Avenues for further research

243 245 246 252 278 282 283 283 290 308 325

Notes Bibliography Index

< previous page

327 330 351

page_viii

next page >

< previous page

page_ix

next page >

Page ix Preface The present work stands at the interface of several converging developments in linguistics and language teaching. Most importantly, perhaps, there has been in recent decades a dramatic increase in the amount of scholarship on text and discourse. Indeed, despite a time-honoured concern with both written and spoken texts in classical rhetoric, systematic discourse analysis did not really get off the ground until the 1970s, with the work of such linguists as Quirk et al. (1972) and van Dijk (1972). The overarching concern in such work has been the empirical investigation of the structure and functions of naturally occurring text rather than the atomistic study of sentence-level syntax inspired by Chomsky. Such paradigm change has not been without influence on the study of language for specific purposes (LSP), a field in which the greatest research effort has probably been expended on academic writing. Here too there has been a move from the microlinguistic analysis of syntax, terminology and word formation prevalent until well into the 1970s (Drozd and Seibicke 1973; Kocourek 1982) towards the study of specialist text (Gläser 1979; Hoffmann 1983; Baumann 1986). A natural consequence of this has been the establishment of contrastive text linguistics as a discipline in its own right; numerous works have been published comparing specific languages at the textual level (cf. for example Newsham 1977 for the language pair English/French; Hinds 1983 for English/Japanese; Kachru 1983 for English/Hindi; Clyne 1987 for English/German; Blumenthal 1997 for French/German; Hatim 1997 for English/Arabic). Another rapidly growing line of research is the study of phraseology. Founded by Bally (1909), this branch of linguistics suffered comparative neglect in Western Europe until fairly recently. It was the great merit of Russian linguistics to intensify phraseological research from the 1940s onwards, establishing precise criteria for the description of various types of conventionalized expressions. With the large-scale shift in the West from idealist Chomskyan linguistics to renewed empirical research, the phraseology of languages such as English, German and French became in its turn the subject of numerous research ventures (e.g. Cowie 1975; Burger 1973; Feilke 1996; Moon 1998; Bresson 1998). Among the results

< previous page

page_ix

next page >

< previous page

page_x

next page >

Page x of such research was the discovery that phraseological units occur in far greater numbers than previously thought, leading researchers such as Sinclair to posit the ‘idiom principle’, whereby ‘a language user has available to him or her a large number of semi-preconstructed phrases that constitute single choices, even though they might appear to be analysable into segments’ (Sinclair 1991:110). Stemming from this, there has been growing recognition in language-teaching circles that multi-word units should be accorded more detailed attention in the foreign language classroom (Nattinger and DeCarrico 1992; Lewis 1993; Cowie 1998), and this view has been confirmed by recent research showing such units to be either under- or over-represented in the linguistic output of L2 learners (Granger 1998a; DeCock 1998; Milton 1999). Last but by no means least, all of the above strands of research have received further impetus from computer corpus linguistics. With unprecedented riches of authentic data at their fingertips, linguists are now in a position to go beyond intuition and pen-and-paper analysis. More empirical and less speculative, their research finally bears comparison with that of hard-pure sciences such as physics and chemistry. It is beginning to open up exciting new perspectives on language. This study is an attempt to weave together the aforementioned strands of research with a view to offering a broad picture of one sub-section of the native writer’s phrasicon: ‘multi-word’, or, more technically, ‘second-level’ discourse markers. As their name indicates, multi-word discourse markers are recurrent word combinations serving pragmatic and/or discourse-structuring functions. Adequate use of such items is pivotal in making academic and other prose texts comprehensible and effective; however, many linguists, teachers and writers have so far been unaware of their very existence. It thus appears that the description of second-level markers is one of the most compelling tasks for the applied linguist, whose aim it is to provide a sound basis for language teaching and expert communication across cultural barriers. In such an endeavour there is much to be said for the adoption of a multilingual approach. Cross-linguistic research has shown that the ways sentences connect may differ from one language to another, often making the rendition of ‘linking words’ less straightforward than dictionary equivalence might suggest. This fits in with evidence from contrastive rhetoric which suggests that L2 writers are prone to reproduce L1 patterns of text organization. In a world where translation and L2 writing skills are at a premium, it therefore makes both lexicographic and pedagogic sense to investigate differences and similarities between markers across languages. This brings us to the question of language pedagogy. With the return of the language awareness movement (Moore 1995), it is now fairly generally realized that the communicative approach to language teaching needs to be enhanced through discovery-based and awareness-raising practices grounded in constructivist learning theory (Rüschoff and Wolff 1999;

< previous page

page_x

next page >

< previous page

page_xi

next page >

Page xi Wolff 2000). It is towards this conception of language learning that the present study wishes to make a useful contribution. In particular, my hope is that learner lexicography, composition teaching and translator training will incorporate some of the findings of the present research, thereby sensitizing language professionals to a discoursecentred approach to language teaching. Secondary-level foreign language teachers in particular continue to see language as a ragbag of vocabulary governed by a fixed set of grammar rules. The more teaching materials incorporate evidence of multi-word units and information on their use in text, the easier it will be to instil in teachers a more holistic view of language integrating textual, situational and lexico-grammatical aspects. To sum up, the present study tries to be innovative in at least three ways. To begin with, it is the first large-scale corpus-based contrastive study to look at three languages at a time. Second, it considers an almost entirely unexplored set of pragmatic markers functioning as structural and semantic units. Third, it closes gaps in dictionaries and textbooks, thus providing assistance for writers, translators and second-language teachers; the index will help the language practitioner locate specific items of interest. For obvious reasons, it is impossible within the narrow compass of a monograph to treat every question in meticulous detail; many avenues of research opened up here can be further explored. What the reader can expect to find, though, is a fairly comprehensive account of a few, carefully selected categories of multi-word marker. Finally, a note on language: in German and North-American academic circles in particular, there is a deplorable tendency to equate pretentious language with superior thought content. I have been at pains to distance myself from this tendency, trying to avoid wherever possible the overelaboration and abstruseness of much pseudoscientific jargon. Culturally, I hope to have fused British practicalism with German thoroughness. Stylistically, I hope to have balanced the elegance of the past with the easy familiarity of the present. Dirk Siepmann Herdecke, February 2004

< previous page

page_xi

next page >

< previous page

page_xii

next page >

Page xii What this book is about This study falls into two parts. The core aim of Part I is for a functional taxonomy of multi-word or ‘second-level’ discourse markers in three European languages (English, German and French) and for a contrastive analysis of their use in continuous text across the three idioms. The author begins by defining the term ‘second-level discourse marker’ and follows this up with an overview of possible syntactic realizations of such markers. He proceeds to investigate what functions they serve and to address the problems attendant upon the translation of the members of three functional categories. A wide variety of corpus sources is laid under contribution with a view to building up a comprehensive picture of second-level discourse marker use. In Part II a critical analysis is made of a corpus comprising advanced English-language writing by German academics and students, as well as of a small number of published translations by professional translators. It is found that the use of second-level markers by these groups compares unfavourably with that of natives. Unnatural writing is shown to be the result of overt errors on the one hand, and of the unusual frequency of occurrence of particular items on the other hand. Lexicographic implications are then considered, which lead to suggestions for the lexicographic treatment of second-level discourse markers in general and pedagogic dictionaries. Author’s note My interest in multi-word discourse markers continues. My website (www.dirk-siepmann.de/multiwordmarkers) contains sections of my thesis that I have not been able to include in this book, an executive summary, and journal articles which deal with other types of multi-word markers than those discussed here.

< previous page

page_xii

next page >

< previous page

page_xiii

next page >

Page xiii Acknowledgements This book is based on my doctoral thesis, submitted at the University of Wuppertal (Germany) in 2003. It took four years of unceasing effort—alongside a full-time job—to bring that thesis to birth, but its actual gestation spanned a much longer period. Directly or indirectly, it profited from the benevolent influence of many. My first and probably greatest debt is to Petra Heise, my English teacher at Otto-Pankok-Schule, Mülheim an der Ruhr, who, although of German origin, used English with a naturalness and precision unequalled by any other German I have ever met. Her love of language was infectious, and prompted me to strive for mastery of the foreign languages of my choice. Among other things, I started drawing up vocabulary lists, some of which formed the basis of the present work. Later in life, my quest for linguistic perfection received further impetus from kindred spirits, such as Professor Serge Gouazé of Valenciennes University and John D.Gallagher of Münster University, who initiated me into the art of translation and taught me the importance of good style. I also derived much benefit from a lecture given by Professor John Sinclair during my student days at Durham and a subsequent visit to COBUILD at the University of Birmingham. This sparked my interest in computer corpus linguistics, the practice of which has given me ever deeper insight into language. My Ph.D. supervisors, Professor Dieter Wolff and Professor Peter Scherfer, deserve special thanks for their part in the making of this book. Dieter Wolff kindly allowed me to use the multilingual translation corpus partly compiled at Wuppertal University. He patiently read two drafts of the manuscript and offered valuable advice. I have found his friendly and supportive manner extremely helpful. Peter Scherfer, a theoretician in the best sense of that abused term, helped to give greater conceptual precision to some of my ideas. I am also indebted to the Series Editors, Professor Tony McEnery and Professor Michael Hoey, as well as the editorial team at Routledge (Terry Clague, Joe Whiting and Yeliz Ali) for seeing this book through to publication. Finally, I should like to thank my partner, Sabine, for her unflinching moral and practical support.

< previous page

page_xiii

next page >

< previous page

page_xiv

next page >

page_xiv

next page >

Page xiv This page intentionally left blank.

< previous page

< previous page

page_1

next page >

page_1

next page >

Page 1 Part I Linguistic considerations

< previous page

< previous page

page_2

next page >

page_2

next page >

Page 2 This page intentionally left blank.

< previous page

< previous page

page_3

next page >

Page 3 1 Observing languages Introduction to Part I Begin with the end in mind. Stephen R.Covey, The Seυen Habits of Highly Effectiυe People Anyone reading academic treatises, reference books or quality newspapers with any regularity will be struck by the recurrence of a particular kind of multi-word unit. Typical examples are it is argued that, it is a fair guess that or the same goes for . Curiously enough, such firmly established phrases seem to have escaped scholarly notice until fairly recently. As a result, they have never been dealt with in any extensive manner, with the exception perhaps of Gallagher’s (1992) ground-breaking article on the translation of the German discourse device erschwerend kommt hinzu, dass, Grieve’s (1996) dictionary of French connectors and four recent articles by Siepmann (2000, 2001a) and Oakey (2002a, 2002b). The first part of this study, then, may be seen as an attempt to redress a perceived imbalance between the poor stock of knowledge about the routine formulae in question and the somewhat larger body of research on related one-word connectives. 1.1 Aims, scope and methodology The core aim of the present work is for a contrastive analysis of such multi-word units. The term ‘contrastive analysis’ is here taken to refer to the processes involved in identifying, recording and describing lexical items which assume identical or similar functions in actual manifestations of English, French and German language use (for further detail, see Section 1.1.2.3 below). Such an analysis depends on two prerequisites: first, an inventory of the lexical class under consideration; second, a categorization, or taxonomy, of the members of this class. Since previous work on phraseology has severely neglected multi-word units of the type exemplified above, both the inventory and the taxonomy used in the present study had to be built up from scratch. There being no copyright on lexicographic material, the full-size inventory underlying this study will,

< previous page

page_3

next page >

< previous page

page_4

next page >

Page 4 however, be published in a separate work (Gallagher et al., in preparation). The taxonomy therefore confines itself to typical instances of each category, and the contrastive analysis is restricted to three major categories of multiword units. The account given here of this part of the phrasicon situates itself within the Firthian tradition of British text linguistics. Accordingly, it is essentially descriptive and data-driven rather than theoretical and introspective. The present chapter discusses the essential foundation of such an approach and the methodological choices entailed by it. Section 1.1 is concerned with general questions regarding the use of corpora and the setting up of interlingual equivalence, while Section 1.2 focuses on corpus compilation. Chapter 2 sets out to define the object of study. I shall argue that it forms a separate sub-class of the lexicon whose members can be described as ‘second-level markers’. Unfortunately, there is as yet no agreed-upon conceptual framework for describing the items belonging to this class. Traditional grammars have tended to classify some of its members, such as à cet effet or pour ce faire under the ‘ragbag’ heading of adverbials; other items, such as the sentence fragments exemplified above, have been altogether excluded from consideration. A satisfactory definition can, however, be arrived at by drawing on two distinct strands of current linguistic research: discourse analysis or text linguistics on the one hand, and lexicology on the other. Drawing on the discourse-analytical literature, I show that second-level markers bear close similarities to oral discourse markers. Drawing on the phraseological literature, I argue that they constitute a distinct type of phraseological unit. Having thus provided a functional-lexicological definition of second-level markers, I move on to outline the entire gamut of syntactic forms they can take. The sheer size of the lexical class under investigation forbids a detailed contrastive analysis for all the members of the class. Chapter 3 therefore sets up a broad taxonomy predicated on the general functions of second-level markers. After these methodological and theoretical preliminaries, the way is open for a finely honed contrastive analysis of three functional categories of second-level markers: exemplifiers, reformulators and inferrers. This is the subject of Chapter 4. In a first step, I give a detailed description of the behaviour of particular items, including their frequency. On this basis, I then consider to what extent interlingual equivalence obtains between items of the functional type under investigation. With the most complex categories it seems wise to follow a stepwise approach proceeding from monolingual analysis to multilingual comparison, thus allowing the reader to form a just understanding of the rationale behind particular equivalences. Where equivalence relations turn out to be more straightforward, discussion will move directly to the multilingual comparison. On the basis of these investigations, Part II looks at

< previous page

page_4

next page >

< previous page

page_5

next page >

Page 5 • how successfully non-native writers and translators cope with multi-word markers; • what implications research into multi-word markers has for general and learner lexicography. 1.1.1 Theoretical foundation The present research locates itself squarely within the British tradition of text analysis established by Firth (1957). This empiricist tradition has a number of features which distinguish it from theory-driven approaches to the study of language. To begin with, the Firthian tradition, the most prominent present-day adherents of which are Halliday, Sinclair, Stubbs, Francis and Hunston, views linguistics as an applied social science (Stubbs 1993:3). On the theoretical side, it foregrounds social interaction as the main determinant of linguistic form. This is in keeping with state-of-the-art discussions of language science such as Feilke (1996), who convincingly argues that whatever disposition for language a child may have, it is a ‘silent’ disposition which only develops into a functioning language through communicative interaction and the institutional practices such interaction puts in place (Feilke 1996:32). On the practical side, a dominant current in the British tradition aims at direct relevance to both the L1 (Coulthard and Sinclair 1975) and the L2 language classroom (cf. the long list of COBUILD publications). Second, the Firthian tradition takes actual occurrences of language as the object of study. Introspective data are considered to be invalid as a primary source of evidence. In this sense, Firth adopts a different approach from Chomsky, who relies almost entirely on invented, sentence-level examples. In the Firthian tradition the data comes first, and the theory is built up from the data. Closely linked with these fundamental features of the Firthian approach is a third one: linguistics is regarded as the study of the meaning of linguistic units. It thus views language from a different angle than Chomskyan linguistics, which stresses the autonomy of particular components of the language system—most importantly syntax (Chomsky 1957:17). Corpus linguists working in the Firthian tradition have ingeniously suggested that much if not all syntax is lexis-driven, thereby at least complementing the Chomskyan view: syntax is driven by lexis: lexis is communicatively prior. As communicators we do not proceed by selecting syntactic structures and independently choosing lexis to slot into them. Instead, we have concepts to convey and communicative choices to make which require central lexical items, and these choices find themselves syntactic structures in which they can be said comfortably and grammatically. (Francis 1993:142)

< previous page

page_5

next page >

< previous page

page_6

next page >

Page 6 The lexico-grammars (Francis et al. 1996, 1998) produced under the supervision of Sinclair provide ample proof of the close association between sense and syntax posited by Francis, specifying, as they do, the behaviour of the major lexical classes (verbs, nouns and adjectives) in terms of their meaning and syntactic preferences. The results show clearly that particular semantic sets are linked with particular syntactic choices and that, conversely, particular syntactic patterns cluster around particular semantic sets. By the same token, linguists working in the Firthian tradition see meaning as at least partially determined by typical combinations of lexical choices or ‘collocability’ on the one hand, and typical combinations of grammatical choices or ‘colligation’ on the other (Hunston 2001). That is, words obtain at least part of their meaning from the contexts in which they typically occur, and, more specifically, from collocates with which they typically team up. In this sense the Firthian tradition is far removed both from componential analysis and from semantic field theory as framed by Trier (1931), where the meaning of a word arises from its position in an abstractly conceived paradigmatic field. A crucial aspect of an item’s meaning is its ‘semantic prosody’, a term which reflects the realization that lexical items become infused with particular connotations due to their typical linguistic environment (Sinclair 1991; Louw 1993; Stubbs 1995). Thus, Sinclair (1991:73–75) demonstrates that the phrasal verb set in carries unfavourable connotations because it co-occurs significantly with words denoting undesirable events or processes such as decay, bad weather or disillusionment. Similarly, the French multi-word unit NP n’a(ura) qu’à bien se tenir, which is unaccountably absent from the major dictionaries, is imbued with a semantic prosody of ‘rivalry’, with the referent of the noun phrase being in competition with another entity mentioned in the surrounding discourse: L’essence n’a qu’à bien se tenir, la lutte pour le titre de carburant le moins nocif s’est resserrée. ( L’Humanité, 11.8.2001) This example conveniently brings us to a fourth major characteristic of the Firthian tradition: it recognizes the pervasiveness of what Sinclair (1991) has called the idiom principle, whereby ‘a language user has available to him or her a large number of semi-preconstructed phrases that constitute single choices, even though they might appear to be analysable into segments’ (Sinclair 1991:110). Corpus work in the Firthian tradition has shown that between 50 and 80 per cent of all text is made up of habitual word associations (Gross 1988; Stubbs 1997; Altenberg 1998). Most importantly for this study, around 20 per cent of all academic text has been shown to consist of lexical bundles of the type by the fact that, similar to that of the, presence of the, it is interesting to, size and shape or theory and prac-

< previous page

page_6

next page >

< previous page

page_7

next page >

Page 7 tice (Biber et al . 1999:995ff.), and it is reasonable to put the amount of academic text taken up by various types of collocation, including multi-word markers, at a minimum of 30 per cent. From a Firthian perspective, then, the negotiation of meaning between language users relies on conventionalized, multi-word sense units rather than isolated words. It is interesting to note that this view of language was anticipated by Bally as early as 1909; he viewed phraseological items as ‘conceptual units’ ( unité de conception, Bally [1909] 1951:76): Ainsi, l’unité lexicologique, telle qu’elle est donnée par l’écriture, le «mot» enfin, est une unité trompeuse et illusoire dans beaucoup de cas et ne correspond pas toujours aux unités de pensée, aux représentations, aux concepts, aux notions de l’esprit…les faits de langage ont un caractère beaucoup plus synthétique qu’on ne le pense et que ne le fait supposer l’analyse dite logique. (Bally [1909] 1951:3ff.) The present study espouses all the above-mentioned features of the Firthian tradition: underpinning it is an appliedlinguistic approach to the study of language which has direct relevance to lexicography (see Part II) as well as the teaching of composition and translation. Any theorization arises directly from the textual evidence produced from manual or computer-driven analysis. Among other things, this book will provide compelling evidence for an even stronger version of the idiom principle than that put forward by Sinclair (1991). It will be shown that collocational patterns are formed not only by two words belonging to different lexical classes but also by multi-word units; such multi-word units will be seen to form lexical dependencies over considerable spans of text (see Chapter 3). 1.1.2 Methodology This study, unlike the bulk of recent corpus-based scholarship, takes a multi-method approach. For one thing, it combines traditional, manual text analysis with computer-based corpus linguistics, thereby bringing together qualitative and quantitative perspectives on the object of study. For another, it blends the contrastivist’s approach with the translatologist’s. 1.1.2.1 Corpus υs. intuition There is growing recognition that language study can benefit from a combination of manual and computer-based analysis. As Kennedy points out: The use of a corpus as a source of evidence however is not necessarily incompatible with any linguistic theory, and progress in the language

< previous page

page_7

next page >

< previous page

page_8

next page >

Page 8 sciences as a whole is likely to benefit from a judicious use of evidence from various sources: texts, introspection, elicitation or other types of experimentation as appropriate. (Kennedy 1998:8; my emphasis) The evidence is abundant that it would be methodologically misguided to let present-day computers, or rather software, perform corpus searches on their own, and some authors wisely stress caution. Siepmann (1998) points up the dangers inherent in the wholesale compilation of dictionaries by computer. A stark result of such an approach is seen in The Cobuild Collocations CD-ROM (Sinclair 1995): it includes compounds (disaster relief, schools inspector), which can be found more readily in a general bilingual or monolingual dictionary, ‘free combinations’1 (thus new is given as a collocate of gallery, or such+disaster ) and, most inappropriately, such manifest absurdities as nature+because, religious+between, or adυances+heaυy, all of which reveal a regrettable lack of human interference and might lead learners of English badly astray. As such examples show, over-dependence on computational methods may lead to a distorted picture of collocational significance. Thus, a restricted collocation such as note that, which may be observed with some frequency in an academic corpus, may be totally absent from a heavily newspaper-based corpus such as the Bank of English. In other words, what is statistically significant in one corpus may be insignificant in another, a point which needs to be kept in mind by any corpus linguist. This leads to the question of whether any corpus can ‘approach the collective linguistic experience of a language community’ (Howarth 1996:72). Clearly, the answer still has to be in the negative at the moment of writing, especially since most of today’s major corpora are narrowly synchronic, comprising only the last ten years or so. Yet in future very large corpora may well be built which will reflect the knowledge and experience of language accumulated over several generations. Everything stands or falls by corpus size, so that it would obviously be wrong at the present time to infer the non-existence of a word or phrase from its absence from a corpus: Sinclair sets the data from a finite set of texts against the intuition of an individual…and dismisses the latter. However, to have absolute faith in either is limiting. The most productive course is to begin with no pre-determined philosophy and to employ data from both sources co-operatively. (Howarth 1996:73) This statement needs to be set against evidence from a substantial literature (e.g. Sinclair 1991; Francis 1993; Siepmann 1999) that both intuition and manual analysis are prone to error and imprecision when it

< previous page

page_8

next page >

< previous page

page_9

next page >

Page 9 comes to describing the realities of language use. Many pre-electronic descriptions testify to this, either in making gross misjudgements about the behaviour of a language item (examples relevant to this study are Nattinger and DeCarrico 1992 and Grieve 1996; see Chapters 2 and 4) or in presenting examples which have the unmistakable ring of artificiality. It is clear, then, that Howarth’s ‘cooperative’ use of data from both sources should be reinterpreted as ‘use in temporal succession’: hypotheses generated from introspection must always be tested against corpus evidence, and corpus evidence may never be altered to fit intuitive beliefs. A further limitation of computer corpus investigation stems from the inability of current retrieval software to extract complex, variable sequences of words (cf. for example Moon 1998:51ff.). In an ideal world, the computer would identify all the instances, including the permutations, of a particular lexical pattern (e.g. ‘it is to be noted’, ‘it must be noted’, ‘it will be noted’, ‘it is notable’, ‘it is noticeable’, ‘it is worth noting’, etc.). This would have the added advantage that categories worth investigating could be determined empirically rather than derived from intuition (cf. McEnery and Wilson 1996:86, footnote 1). The reality, however, is that automatic routines are not yet sophisticated enough to process data in terms of semantic function, making it particularly difficult to detect equivalences among transformationally unpredictable marker words and phrases of the kind under analysis here. It follows that to rely on automatic routines would be to commit a serious fallacy: that of allowing linguistic theory to be ruled by computer technology. 1.1.2.2 Sampling and categorization The rationale for a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods is simple enough: to be able to study multiword discourse markers in a machine-readable corpus one needs first to compile an ocular scan-based inventory, or ‘look-up list’, of such items and then to categorize its content (cf. Schmied 1987). Next a computer corpus can be tapped to check the categories thus developed against a larger amount of authentic data.2 When conducting such qualitative research, the analyst has to extend the corpus enquiry beyond the narrow span of the usual KWIC concordances to take account of longer pieces of text. This kind of investigation may then provide feedback which will necessitate a rethinking of categories,3 additions to the inventory, and so on, in an iterative cycle. Once a categorized list has been drawn up, the investigation can proceed on a quantitative basis, enabling the analyst to assign frequencies to various tokens of discourse markers and to separate regular and typical associations from marginal occurrences. It is then possible to approximate to citation forms of discourse markers to be used in dictionaries and teaching materials such as those discussed in Part II of this study.

< previous page

page_9

next page >

< previous page

page_10

next page >

Page 10 1.1.2.3 Contrastiυe linguistics υs. translation studies Coming now to the distinction between contrastive and translation studies, we find that the area is fraught with terminological confusion (cf. Krzeszowski 1990:11; Wilss 1996:71ff.).4 The distinction is admittedly a rather fine one; contrastivity, it will be said, is what unites the two branches of language science under consideration. Yet, as Wilss (1996:71ff., esp. 81) and Gallagher (1993:150) point out, contrastive linguistics is generally regarded as operating at the level of abstract language systems, with the aim of segmenting and classifying linguistic data, whereas translatology is deemed to work at the level of actual language use. This reflects the recognition that linguistic units singled out as equivalent may not automatically correspond to translation units and that, conversely, text constituents of widely varying grammatical structure and length may take on similar functions in different languages. There is some truth in the above distinction insofar as one wishes to uphold the traditional version of the Saussurean dichotomy between ‘langue’ and ‘parole’, which is rapidly losing ground in the face of new evidence from corpus linguistics. Especially problematic is the structuralist assumption that lexis and syntax are neatly distinct and autonomous systems which do not impact on one another other than through the operation of general semantic rules and regularities. Lexico-grammars such as Francis et al. (1996, 1998) provide overwhelming evidence to the contrary: there is, in fact, a high degree of interdependence between communicative, lexical and syntactic choices or, more simply put, between sense and syntax. This clearly undermines the Saussurean dichotomy (cf. Sinclair 1991): in the absence of an independent syntactic core of language it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to specify the essence of an abstractly conceived language system; at best, we may assume a large number of heterogeneous lexico-textual subsystems or patterns5 or, as Sinclair (1991:105) has it, an ‘integrated sense-structure complex’. The only unifying feature would be the notion of pattern as such, as described in Hunston and Francis (2000) and Hunston (2001). Given the impossibility of generalizing across instances of language use to arrive at a unifying theory, the distinction between ‘langue’-centred contrastive linguistics and ‘parole’-centred translatology becomes blurred accordingly.6 The time is thus ripe for a paradigm shift which will considerably widen the scope of contrastive linguistics. A new-paradigm contrastive linguistics drawing on computer corpora will enable us to compare lexico-textual subsystems across languages at a hitherto unimagined degree of delicacy. Many equivalences which have until now been assumed to be peculiar to one text, and therefore within the purview of translation studies rather than contrastive linguistics, will then turn out to be attributable to regular correspondences between lexico-textual subsystems or to deviations from such subsystems. This will

< previous page

page_10

next page >

< previous page

page_11

next page >

Page 11 be particularly true with pragmatic texts such as newspaper articles, treaties or manuals, and only slightly less so with literary texts (to the extent that novelists or poets defamiliarize language use). Table 1.1 contains a brief example from a textbook of translation (Lozes and Lozes 1994) which will illustrate what is meant. For the inexperienced linguist, both the English original and the French translation in Table 1.1 may at first glance appear to contain a large number of ‘creative’, one-off occurrences. As a corpus-linguistic investigation shows, nothing could be further from the truth. Leaving aside the headline for the moment, we can see that the English text begins with a fixed expression (as long as I can remember), which can be rendered by a small number of equally fixed French equivalents (d’aussi loin que je me souυienne, aussi loin que je me souυienne). Here the relevant English and French lexico-textual subsystems resemble each other perfectly. It is somewhat different with the lexico-textual subsystem comprising the subject and the verb of the relative clause. This pattern can be glossed as in Table 1.2. In Francis et al. (1996:8) this pattern is subsumed under a more general pattern termed the ‘“Begin” and “Stop” Group’. Other typical members of this group include the items presented in Table 1.3. It is fairly easy to locate the same lexico-textual subsystem in newspaper Table 1.1 An excerpt from a textbook of translation English original French translation A silver lining to antiques fair in Dublin Eclaircie sur le Salon des Antiquaires de Dublin As long as I can remember, the Irish Antiques Aussi loin que je me souvienne, le Salon des Antiquaires Dealers’ Fair, which opens next Monday in the irlandais, qui ouvre ses portes lundi prochain à Mansion House à Mansion House in Dublin, has been preceded by Dublin, est précédé de pleurs et de gémissements de la part des groans of despair from the antique trade. This year, gens de la profession. Cette année, vingt-septième anniversaire the 27th year of the event is no exception. de cette manifestation, ne fait pas exception. Source: adapted from Lozes and Lozes 1994:42–43 Table 1.2 A lexico-textual subsystem Eυent/public place (trade fair, museum, shop,…) Verb expressing start of eυent The Irish Antique Dealers’ Fair opens

< previous page

page_11

next page >

< previous page

page_12

next page >

Page 12 Table 1.3 Examples of a lexico-textual subsystem comprising verbs denoting ‘beginning’ and ‘ending’ The talks began The negotiations ended Table 1.4 A segment of the French lexico-textual subsystem noun (event)+verb (expressing start of event) Eυent/public place (trade fair, museum, shop,…) Verb expressing start of eυent le musée de l’Aventure Peugeot ouvre ses portes le Salon de l’agriculture ouvrira ses portes French; one then finds that the verb ouυrir is not normally used on its own in this pattern (see Table 1.4). A look at the entire subsystem also reveals that an indirect object is often appended to the phrase ouυrir ses portes, a variant which Lozes and Lozes (1994) fail to mention. This indirect object commonly takes the form aux υisiteurs or au public . In their commentary Lozes and Lozes (1994:43) describe their rendition of open by ouυrir ses portes as an instance of ‘étoffement’ (Vinay and Darbelnet 1958:9), or syntactic augmentation. It thus appears as if they have used a textspecific translation procedure which falls outside the scope of contrastive linguistics, especially since the targetlanguage syntagm differs in structure and length from the source-language syntagm. However, as our corpus investigation has shown, the augmentation in question might equally well be regarded as a regular equivalence amenable to contrastive analysis. Similar analyses could be made for all the other translatorial choices evident in the above texts. This is because, as corpus linguists (Gross 1988; Stubbs 1997; Altenberg 1998) have demonstrated, up to 80 per cent of all text is made up of habitual word associations, while the remaining 20 per cent consists of language of regular composition or slight deviations from the collocational norm. Another example from my own translation work may serve to illustrate how contrastive analysis can be operationalized; the source and target texts are excerpts from the website of a Mallorca-based German photo grapher (see Table 1.5). The final sentence of this excerpt is not easy to translate into idiomatic English, and the superficial difference in structure and length between the source and target versions might suggest that the English translation is merely a matter of intuition. It is of course true that, in practice, the translator’s accumulated knowledge and experience or, to put it in cognitive-psychological terms, his ‘procedural knowledge’, will

< previous page

page_12

next page >

< previous page

page_13

next page >

Page 13 Table 1.5 German original and English translation of a website German original English translation Für Journalisten bieten wir einen umfassenden Service, We provide a comprehensive service for journalists, which der sich schon oft arbeitserleichtend bewährt hat: has often contributed to lightening their workload: time Terminplanung vor der Anreise scheduling prior to arrival Flughafenabholung collection from airport Separate Gästewohnung mit Terrasse separate guest flat with roof garden Übersetzungen translation service Internetzugang ADSL und LEONARDO PRO Internet access ADSL and LEONARDO PRO Fahrdienst—Inselscout… chauffeur service—island scout… …und natürlich Fotografie. …and, of course, photography. So ersparen Sie sich unnötige Zeitverluste wegen This will save you from wasting time unnecessarily trying Ortsunkenntnis, Taxi, Mietwagen, Hotelbuchung, to find your way around and looking for taxis, hire cars, Übersetzer etc. hotels, translators, etc.

< previous page

page_13

next page >

< previous page

page_14

next page >

Page 14 lead him to automatically transpose the noun Zeitυerluste to a verb. Yet such a strategy can be operationalized in terms of lexico-textual subsystems. The translator has to convey the concept of ‘Zeitverlust’ in neutral English style. The central lexical items available for this purpose are noun+verb collocations, notably waste time, lose time and squander time, rather than the highly formal compound noun time loss; 7 of these noun+verb collocations, waste time is the most common. The lexico syntactic subsystem containing the verb waste in this sense is described in Francis et al. (1996:289–290). There the translator learns that verbs concerned with passing time in a particular way typically enter the pattern verb+noun phrase+ -ing clause; he therefore has to construct his target sentence around this pattern, so that the prepositional phrase wegen Ortsunkenntnis, Taxi, Mietwagen, Hotelbuchung, Übersetzer has to be converted into an -ing clause and the compound nouns have to be translated by means of verbs. The translator may now consult a corpus or the Internet for the construction under discussion, and will find the German meaning expressed as follows: Plan the storage of your equipment so that you will not waste time unnecessarily in looking around for them. Firms spend half their time dealing with lawyers… Your effects unit really saved me from lounging around and wasting time nunecessarily. We should not spend our time worrying about the future… Don’t spend too much time shopping… But before Mr Major and Mr Blair waste more time trying to double-guess them… …waste management time dealing with such a challenge it does not waste much time worrying about its pride being hurt …skilled reserves who can jump back in without losing time learning a routine This leaves him with possible chunks such as waste time (unnecessarily)/spend too much time/lose time (unnecessarily)…worrying about/dealing with/looking for/trying to… Note that such corpus-based analysis throws up a far greater variety of equivalences than intuition, precisely because it is based on a comparison of lexico-textual subsystems. The last step is to ferret out an English equivalent for the German collocation Zeitυerlust+ersparen, such as save (s.o.) from wasting time, help (s.o.) avoid wasting time or stop (s.o.) [from] wasting time. Thus, we arrive at the variants shown in Table 1.6. In a way such an analysis exemplifies the interplay between the open-

< previous page

page_14

next page >

< previous page

page_15

next page >

Page 15 Table 1.6 Lexico-syntactic variants This will save you from These services will stop you (from) will help you (to) avoid wasting time (unnecessarily) (in) losing time (unnecessarily) (in) spending too much time (in) trying to find your way around and looking for… having to find your way around and worrying about… finding your way around and dealing with (such matters as) choice principle and the idiom principle (Sinclair 1991). Each ‘open’ choice of a particular variant entails specific idiomatic constraints on the surrounding discourse, the central open choices in the present example being the verbs stop/saυe and waste/spend . An alternative corpus search could start with the concept of ‘problem avoidance’, yielding less faithful but functionally equivalent translations such as this will save you the hassle/the trouble of finding your way around Mallorca…, these serυices will saυe (you) hours of searching for…, these serυices will saυe hours of research time for journalists, etc.8 It thus appears that, in cases where two texts are designed to assume the same, or closely similar functions in two cultures (‘Funktionskonstanz, or “functional invariability”, as skopos’, see Reiß and Vermeer 1984), a corpus-based contrastive analysis can supply objective criteria for the discovery and assessment of any translation decision, thereby providing the basis for a fusion of contrastive linguistics and translatology. In this view translation solutions, rather than being one-off, parole-based occurrences, turn out to be instantiations of sense-structure complexes existing in more than one language; the translator’s task is to identify the key semantic concepts contained in the text to be translated, to study target-language lexico-textual subsystems encoding these concepts and to build the target text around the patterns of colligation, collocation and text grammar found in these subsystems. In the rare event, however, that the client commissions a translation whose function differs from that of the source text, contrastive linguistics and translation science must part company. The relevance of this latter type of translation situation has, however, been overstated by translation theorists (cf. Schmitt 1990), and this has led to a concurrent overstatement of the differences between contrastive and translation studies. In this study, then, for want of a better expression, I use the term ‘contrastive analysis’ to refer to the processes involved in identifying and recording multi-word units which assume identical or similar functions in actual manifestations of English, French and German language use. The

< previous page

page_15

next page >

< previous page

page_16

next page >

Page 16 investigation is primarily non-directional, thereby avoiding the pitfalls of comparing already translated texts in an area where discourse patterns have been shown to be culture-specific (cf. for example Kußmaul 1978; Clyne 1981, 1987; Gnutzmann and Lange 1990; Oldenburg 1992).9 Before considering the procedures of contrastive analysis in greater detail, we need to address the vexed question of equivalence. 1.1.2.4 Equiυalence in contrastiυe analysis How can we define and assess interlingual equivalence between discourse markers? The concept, ‘fundamental to translation studies’ (Sager 1994:142) and to contrastive linguistics, has probably caused more ink to flow than any other translatological term, and various typologies of equivalence have been proposed: a distinction may, for example, be made between connotative and denotative equivalence or between cognitive and linguistic equivalence (see Koller 1992; Sager 1994). Full equivalence between two or more languages is a rare event; it can be said to obtain only in the case of one-toone correspondences between place-names such as English London and French Londres or between clearly defined monosemous words such as French téléphone and German Telefon . Generally speaking, however, equivalence denotes similarity rather than identity of source and target-language units. For evidence of this, we need look no further than the word level, where the fuzzy, context-bound nature of meaning leads to a potentially infinite number of renderings for any polysemous word. Thus, a French adjective like sauυage covers such a wide spectrum of meanings that English equivalents may range from shy at one end of the spectrum to cruel at the other, with an abundance of subtly differentiated, context-specific translations in between (cf. Hausmann 1995:21). The foregoing implies that the equivalence of source and target-language multi-word markers can only be established on the basis of functional similarities in their contextual uses, and will usually be subject to certain constraints. For the purposes of the present study, therefore, equivalence can be defined as follows: Equivalence is said to obtain between a source-language item A and a target-language item B if and only if A performs a function in source-language contexts which is identical with, or similar to, the function assumed by B in target-language contexts. The basis of comparison, or tertium comparationis, is thus onomasiological or, more precisely, functionalonomasiological. Possible objections to a functional definition of equivalence can be easily dismissed. Hoey and Houghton (1998:47), for example, object to the use of semantic and/or functional equivalence as a tertium comparationis on the grounds that ‘a

< previous page

page_16

next page >

< previous page

page_17

next page >

Page 17 pair of sentences might be semantically and/or pragmatically equivalent, but have widely differing likelihoods of occurrence in the languages from which they are drawn’. Clearly, this objection becomes invalid in the context of a corpus-driven methodology using frequency counts to control for such factors as differing probabilities of occurrence across languages. Beyond this, functional equivalence has been found too narrow a notion in Métrich’s (1998) investigation into the translation of German particles. Comparing such sentences as Ich glaube kaum, dass er das schafft, aber er kann es ja versuchen. Je ne pense pas qu’il réussisse, mais il peut toujours essayer. (Métrich 1998:197) he notes that, strictly speaking, the German particle ja and the French particle toujours are not functionally equivalent: evidential ja points to the existence of a remote possibility of success, whereas toujours has a chiefly temporal meaning. There is thus no functional equivalence between the two markers, although the rendition of ja by toujours is intuitively satisfactory. This leads Métrich (1998:198) to propose a much broader definition of the targetlanguage equivalent as that lexical item which must be omitted in the target-language text if the particle is omitted from the source-language text. The problem with this definition is that it relies entirely on already translated material, taking for granted the equivalence of the source and target-language texts in which the markers are embedded. Hence also its circularity: the equivalence of the target sentences defines the equivalence of the marker words, and vice versa. Thus, while Métrich’s definition of equivalence is of great lexicographic value, it would be methodologically unsound for this study to depart from a functional definition. It is also unnecessary, since multiword units behave differently from the kind of particle studied by Métrich. 1.1.2.5 Procedure in contrastiυe analysis This brings us to the procedure followed in establishing functional equivalence between the monolingual data, a procedure common to all contrastive studies (cf. Schmidt 1996): the first step is to identify potential equivalents, i.e. items fulfilling identical or similar functions in the languages under survey. This is followed by a close comparison of such potential equivalents with a view to determining formal, semantic and/or functional similarities and differences. This then leads to a sub-categorization of the material by semantic-pragmatic field; in the process it may be found that some items defy straightforward classification, as is the case with any attempt to arrange lexis into neatly bounded sets. In a final step an analysis is made of the use of potential translation equivalents in actual text, the focus being on the various discoursal constraints placed upon their use as

< previous page

page_17

next page >

< previous page

page_18

next page >

Page 18 well as on the strategies which can be employed by translators to cope with such constraints. A contrastive analysis of the kind just described yielded the taxonomy of discourse markers presented in Chapter 3 and the more finely grained analysis of particular functional sets offered in Chapter 4. To ensure perfect reliability, the analyst would have to make a complex factor analysis for each individual type of equivalence. More concretely, she would have to analyse dozens of occurrences of each marker, taken from a wide variety of authors, within a large number of parameters. Such an investigation, while clearly beyond the capacities of a single individual, would equally well be outside the reach of professional research groups. This is because function can only be analysed according to common-sense criteria which may differ from one person to another (Courdier et al. 1994). Added to this are problems stemming from the fuzzy nature of ‘meaning’ or ‘function’, a point already touched upon in Section 1.1.2.4. If a complex factor analysis were to be made, it would be found that no two occurrences of a particular marker are completely identical, and that the set of function/meaning components to be taken into account for definitional purposes can be extended at will (cf. Hausmann 1995:19). In other words, the neat compartmentalizing of meanings or functions characteristic of lexicography and other branches of linguistics can do no more than partially capture an infinitely complex reality. With multilingual contrastive analysis, the situation is further compounded by the fact that no two linguists will have exactly the same knowledge of two or more languages. That is, no individual linguist will have exactly the same command of, say, English and French; nor will she have the same command of, say, French as another linguist. This can be easily illustrated with Grieve’s (1996) study of discourse devices in written French, for Grieve, although a native speaker of English, overlooks a large number of English equivalents of the connectors he discusses (see Chapter 4 for detailed evidence). 1.1.2.6 Analytic framework The remaining question is what framework to use for describing and analysing the complex web of discourse relations. Among the wide variety of text-linguistic models two distinct currents are discernible (Brinker 1988:12–17; Oldenburg 1992:42–47): on one side are the proponents of system-oriented text linguistics, who set out to describe the propositional structure of texts by analogy with traditional sentence-based grammar; on the other are communication-oriented text linguists, who analyse text in terms of a model of communication which takes full account of the situational and cultural embedding of text. A moment’s reflection will reveal that the two approaches are in fact complementary, as it is necessary to

< previous page

page_18

next page >

< previous page

page_19

next page >

Page 19 relate the function and propositional content of particular text segments to their linguistic realizations at the text surface. Fusing as it does the two ways of seeing just mentioned, the model developed by Hatim and Mason (1990) has been chosen for the present study. Hatim and Mason distinguish between two hierarchically arranged subdivisions of text, namely elements and sequences, defining an ‘element’ as ‘the smallest lexico-grammatical unit which can fulfil some rhetorical function’ and a sequence as ‘a unit…which normally consists of more than one element and which serves a higher-order rhetorical function than that of the individual elements in question’. In a later version of this model, Hatim (1997:57) recognizes that a sequence may be realized by only one element. To ‘elements’ and ‘sequences’ I have added the notion of ‘text segment’, or ‘Teiltextsegment’, by which is here meant a piece of text comprising at least two sequences. Firm support for such a notion is provided by German studies in text linguistics such as Hengst (1985), Oldenburg (1992), Gil (1995) and Eggs (1996), which involve close readings of the logico-semantic and pragmatic structure of texts. The functions served by elements, sequences and text segments can be described in terms of Rhetorical Structure Theory (Mann and Thompson 1988), hereafter abbreviated as RST. RST likens the rhetorical relations between text spans to those obtaining between clause complexes. There are two major types of rhetorical relations: nucleussatellite and list. Drawing an analogy with the clause complex, we can compare to hypotaxis the complex nucleussatellite relations, and to parataxis the list relations formed by the simple joining together of independent elements. Judging from available RST analyses, the former are far more frequent than the latter. Table 1.7 briefly explains the majority of nucleus-satellite relations. Each of these relations receives more detailed treatment in terms of the constraints placed upon it, its effect and the locus of this effect. Thus, for example, the background relation is defined as follows (Mann and Thompson 1988): constraints on N: R won’t comprehend N sufficiently before reading text of S constraints on the N+S combination: S increases the ability of R to comprehend an element in N the effect: R’s ability to comprehend N increases locus of the effect: N To illustrate the workings of RST, let us consider a simple example taken from the beginning of a Scientific American article (Mann 1999): 1) Lactose and Lactase 2) Lactose is milk sugar, 3) the enzyme lactase breaks it down. 4) For

< previous page

page_19

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_20

Page 20 Table 1.7 Nucleus-satellite relations Relation Nucleus name Antithesis Ideas favoured by the author Background Text whose understanding is being facilitated Circumstance Text expressing the events or ideas occurring in the interpretive context Concession Situation affirmed by author

Satellite Ideas disfavoured by the author Text for facilitating understanding An interpretive context of situation or time

Situation which is apparently inconsistent but also affirmed by author Condition Action or situation whose occurrence results from Conditioning situation the occurrence of the conditioning situation Contrast Situation which is compared with another situation Situation which is compared with another situation that is (a) identical with another situation in at that is (a) identical with another situation in at least some respects, (b) similar to, or different least some respects, (b) similar to, or different from, another situation in a few respects from, another situation in a few respects Elaboration Basic information Additional information Enablement An action Information intended to aid the reader in performing an action Eυaluation A situation An evaluative comment about the situation Eυidence A claim Information intended to increase the reader’s belief in the claim Interpretation A situation An interpretation of the situation Justify Text Information supporting the writer’s right to express the text Motiυation An action Information intended to increase the reader’s desire to perform the action Non-υolitionalA situation Another situation which causes that one, but not cause by anyone’s deliberate action Non-υolitionalA situation Another situation which is caused by that one, but result not by anyone’s deliberate action Otherwise Action or situation whose occurrence results from Conditioning situation (antithe lack of occurrence of the conditioning situation conditional) Purpose An intended situation The intent behind the situation Restatement A situation A re-expression of the situation Solutionhood A situation or method supporting full or partial A question, request, problem, or other expressed satisfaction of the need need Summary Text A short summary of that text Volitional A situation Another situation which causes that one, by cause someone’s deliberate action Volitional A situation Another situation which is caused by that one, by result someone’s deliberate action Sources: adapted from Mann and Thompson 1988, Mann 1999

< previous page

page_20

next page >

< previous page

page_21

next page >

Page 21 want of lactase most adults cannot digest milk. 5) In populations that drink milk the adults have more lactase, perhaps through natural selection. Five text elements may be recognized in the excerpt under discussion, preceded by the numbers 1 to 5. At the broadest level, two relations are clearly discernible: the relation holding between 2 and 3 is one of elaboration, that holding between 4 and 5 is one of contrast. Adding a second layer of dependency structure, we find that elements 2 and 3 form a back-ground relation with elements 4 and 5. At yet another level of analysis we find that the heading (1) stands in a ‘preparation relation’ with the rest of the excerpt. An important reason for the adoption of RST is that this framework is open to extension. New relations or subrelations can be added to existing ones if need be. RST is thus in keeping with the Firthian tradition of text analysis, which, as explained on p.5, gives absolute priority to the data. Moreover, RST has already proved a useful heuristic tool in contrastive analysis (cf. Salkie and Oates 1999); its particular value lies in its ability to relate linkage by conjunctions and tacit, or ‘zero’, linkage. A number of criticisms have been made of RST. The most serious charge is that it fails to recognize the possibility of more than one relation at a time existing between nucleus and satellite (Martin 1992:259–260). At first blush, a simple solution might be to extend RST with a view to covering such ‘dual relations’, but there is the added complication that two or more stretches of text may be interrelated at different hierarchical levels. For example, two pieces of evidence following and supporting an assertion may in turn be related to each other through addition or comparison. However, this short-coming is not directly relevant to the present research, which focuses on the primary functions of specific second-level markers in specific text types, not on the whole range of possible conjunctive relations in text at large. More broadly speaking, the plethora of discourse-analytic approaches demonstrates that there is no one definitive way of analysing discursive relationships. The human analyst’s identification of textual units is crucially dependent on her understanding of the text being examined. Nowhere can this be seen more clearly than in the self-defeating attempts of earlier literary criticism to establish the ‘ultimate’ meaning of a text. Today, with the rise of reader and reception theory, the idea associated with author-centred or text-centred criticism of a singular, unified reading has given way to reader-centred notions of infinitely many possible readings. Admittedly, academic texts are a far less complex text type in this regard, and we are here concerned with discourse relations rather than ‘ultimate meaning’, but there clearly remains an element of uncertainty in any text analysis. The same, it may be noted at this juncture, holds true for the classification of discourse markers. As a rule, there seems to be agreement among analysts on made-up examples deemed to be prototypical, but such theorizing

< previous page

page_21

next page >

< previous page

page_22

next page >

Page 22 cannot normally stand up to the complex evidence of language as it is (see Degand 1998; Mauranen 1993). Given the bewildering variety of heuristic-interpretative methods of text analysis, it seems judicious, therefore, to keep an open mind: Further, given the currently unsatisfactory state of knowledge, descriptive and analytic textlinguistic models should be intuitively plausible. As verifiable findings on the structure of language acts are still largely missing, the criterion of plausibility seems best suited to the evaluation of such models and of the results they yield. This is because every native speaker of a language has an intuitive knowledge of text and text structures. (Oldenburg 1992:47; my translation) Mann and Thompson also take explicit account of the subjectivity of the human analyst: Given the nature of text analysis, these are judgments of plausibility rather than certainty…the analyst is judging whether it is plausible that the writer desires the specified condition. (Mann and Thompson 1988:245) The model I have proposed, borrowing from Hatim and Mason (1990) as well as Mann and Thompson (1988), clearly meets the criterion of intuitive plausibility. 1.2 Corpora and corpus-enquiry tools Shall I make spirits fetch me what I please, resolve me of all ambiguities. Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus Since at least the 1980s language science has been in the throes of a ‘corpus revolution’. Naturally occurring data, available in their millions from machine-held collections of text, have become the life-blood of the discipline. Indeed, the ever-expanding size of corpora may tempt linguists and translation scholars to indulge Faustian fantasies of omniscience. It is not, of course, the use of electronic corpora in itself that is new; in France, for example, the computerized database Frantext has existed for over forty years (Habert et al. 1997:7). Rather, the revolution has been made possible by increasing ease of access to electronic text and corpora,10 their enrichment through computerized annotation and the ability of micro-computers to process ever-larger stretches of text at ever-greater speeds. This latter development has also resulted in data-driven approaches making inroads into translation and foreign language classes (Johns and King 1991). In view of the foregoing considerations it is not surprising that this

< previous page

page_22

next page >

< previous page

page_23

next page >

Page 23 study, too, avails itself of machine-readable corpora. Work with such corpora raises a number of methodological and practical issues. Foremost amongst these is the relationship, discussed in Section 1.1.2.1, between intuition and corpus evidence, but almost equally important are the issues associated with the compilation and analysis of corpora. These are the subject of the present chapter, which confines itself to native speaker corpora; learner corpora will occupy us in Part II. 1.2.1 Corpus building and information retrieval This is not the place to give a detailed account of the history, aims and methods of corpus linguistics.11 I shall therefore confine my discussion to the issues of corpus building and information retrieval as they apply to the present research, which draws its data from five different types of computer-readable text archive in each language: • electronic editions of wide-circulation quality newspapers and news magazines ( The Times, the Guardian, The Economist, Le Monde, Le Monde diplomatique, Süddeutsche Zeitung, Frankfurter Rundschau, Der Spiegel ) (see Section 1.2.2.1); • the largest reference work available on CD-ROM (Britannica CD, CD-ROM UNIVERSALIS, Gabler Wirtschaftslexikon CD-ROM) (see Section 1.2.2.2); • a large corpus of academic texts produced from reviews, journal articles, doctoral theses and portions of books (see Section 1.2.2.3); • a ten-million-word parallel corpus made up of evenly sized subsections representing various disciplines of the fullsize academic corpora; the texts in the parallel corpora are roughly matched by such criteria as date of composition and text category (see Section 1.2.2.4); • a multilingual translation corpus comprising a variety of text categories from both fictional and non-fictional sources.12 Table 1.8 gives a breakdown of the sources used by corpus type, content, size, baseline year and analysis software. The research based on these corpora was divided into two phases: corpus building (Section 1.2.2) and text analysis (Section 1.2.3). I will deal with these in turn. 1.2.2 Corpus design and compilation The corpus linguist has to address a number of competing design issues (see Kennedy 1998; Pearson 1998), including: • time and resources available for corpus building • purpose of the research

< previous page

page_23

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_24

Page 24 Table 1.8 Corpora used Corpus TypeContent

Word Baseline year count

Analysis software

News corpora (see Section 1.2.2.1) British Full- Issues of The Times, the Guardian and The 100 1990 WordSmith newspapers and text Economist, published in London million Concordancer, news magazines Microconcord; (NE) Search Engine French Full- Issues of Le Monde and Le Monde diplomatique, 100 1990 WordSmith newspapers and text published in Paris million Concordancer, news magazines Microconcord; (NF) Search Engine German Full- Issues of Süddeutsche Zeitung, Frankfurter 100 1990 WordSmith newspapers and text Rundschau and Der Spiegel, published respectively million Concordancer, news magazines in Stuttgart, Frankfurt and Hamburg Microconcord; (NG) Search Engine CD-ROM-based corpora (see Section 1.2.2.2) Encylopaedia Full- Humanities and sciences texts 50 1996 Netscape Navigator Britannica (EB) text million Encyclopedic Full- Humanities and sciences texts 50 1996 Search Engine Universalis (EU) text million Gablers Full- Economics texts 6 1994 Search Engine Wirtschaftslexikon text million (GW) Full-text academic corpora (see Section 1.2.2.3) Corpus of Full- Reviews, journal articles, doctoral theses and 50 1980 (less than WordSmith academic English text portions of books million 5% of texts Concordancer, (CAE) predate 1980) Microconcord Corpus of Full- Reviews, journal articles, doctoral theses and 30 1980 (less than WordSmith academic French text portions of books million 5% of texts Concordancer, (CAF) predate 1980) Microconcord Corpus of Full- Reviews, journal articles, doctoral theses and 30 1980 (less than WordSmith academic German text portions of books million 5% of texts Concordancer, (CAG) predate 1980) Microconcord Parallel academic corpora (see Section 1.2.2.4) Parallel corpus of Full- Reviews, journal articles and portions of books 9.5 1980 WordSmith academic English text from CAE million Concordancer, (PCAE) Microconcord Parallel corpus of Full- Reviews, journal articles and portions of books 9.5 1980 WordSmith academic French text from CAF million Concordancer, (PCAF) Microconcord Parallel corpus of Full- Reviews, journal articles and portions of books 9.5 1980 WordSmith academic German text from CAG million Concordancer, (PCAG) Microconcord Multilingual translation corpus (see Section 1.2.2.4) Multilingual Full- Academic prose, novels, EU financial regulations, 1950 Multiconcord translation corpus text manuals, etc. (MTC)

< previous page

page_24

next page >

< previous page

page_25

next page >

Page 25 • size • text type and length • text categorization by subject area • baseline year • sources and availability of electronic text • publication status and technicality As we shall see, these issues are fairly easy to settle as regards news corpora, while academic corpora are more problematic. 1.2.2.1 News corpora Such has been the invasion of journalistic genres into all spheres of life that a study of discourse cannot do without them. Newspaper language has been aptly described as a ‘perennial Fountain of Youth’ (Gallagher 1982:7) in which living idioms are constantly renewed. Next to the novel, the newspaper article is probably the single most widely read written genre (Kennedy 1998:49), holding a pivotal place in the evolution of any language of the civilized world. It is also common knowledge that there is ample cross-fertilization between the language of academics and that of journalists. Just as academic ‘shop talk’ tends to influence the popular science writer, so journalistic coinages spill over into academic treatises. Annual editions of major quality papers on CD-ROM provide a commercially available, ‘pre-designed’ means for linguists to study news media language. The prodigious dimensions of such text archives—usually between 30 and 40 million words per CD-ROM—make it possible to give an accurate and reliable portrait of the use which journalists make of such linguistic items as discourse markers. The ready availability of text on archival CD-ROMs led to a ‘pragmatic’ sampling approach which took account of both the representativeness and the quality of the writing involved. For each language under investigation, 90 per cent of the corpus texts was collected from ‘highbrow’ broadsheets, while 10 per cent was culled from quality news magazines (see p. 24). Texts were selected from across the various daily, weekly or monthly sections appearing in the news media under consideration; the corpus material thus obtained was transferred on to the hard disk of a computer. No claim is made here that the news corpora are representative of the written language as a whole; rather, the assumption is simply that they represent a broad sample of ordinary usage in the British, French and German quality press in the 1990s. While it is true that even a 100-million-word corpus is small compared to the totality of written news media text published in the 1990s, work on other large corpora such as the Bank of English has shown that 100 million words taken from various sources is a sufficient sample to guarantee representativeness and reliability.

< previous page

page_25

next page >

< previous page

page_26

next page >

Page 26 1.2.2.2 Reference CD-ROMs With the reference CD-ROMs the issues of design and compilation have, as it were, been settled by the publishers. The Britannica CD boasts 65,000 text articles, whereas the French-language CD-ROM Uniυersalis contains 22,000, a figure exactly equalled by the German Gabler Wirtschaftslexikon CD-ROM. With articles ranging from brief definitions through impressionistic overviews to all-encompassing expositions, it may be appropriate to express more precisely the size of these storehouses of scholarly writing. Thus, at a conservative estimate, the Britannica and Uniυersalis CD-ROMs run to approximately 50 million words each, while the Gabler Wirtschaftslexikon, at around 6 million words, is considerably smaller. This apparent drawback is tempered by the fact that the Gabler Wirtschaftslexikon is devoted in its entirety to a humanities discipline and therefore easy to understand for the analyst. 1.2.2.3 The full-size academic corpora Let us now consider one by one the aforementioned design issues as they apply to the construction of the three fullsize corpora of academic English, French and German. 1.2.2.3.1 TIME AND RESOURCES AVAILABLE For the corpus linguist working in isolation, practical considerations preclude any attempt to emulate large-scale corpus compilation projects. Since no sizeable corpus of academic English, French or German was publicly available at the time this study got under way, I approached a number of publishers to obtain electronic versions of academic books. Apart from my French publisher Ellipses, who kindly sent two textbooks on floppy disk, no other company was willing to contribute in the absence of substantial pecuniary rewards. I therefore had no alternative but to collect texts from other sources. Text collection took two forms: first and foremost, I downloaded copyright-free texts on to my PC from electronic journals and academic text archives mounted on the Internet. Time-consuming as this text capture was, taking up at least 100 man-hours per corpus, it still seemed the most viable option considering the extra expenditure of money, time and effort involved in scanning texts. Second, a small number of authors kindly supplied a few publications on floppy disk. 1.2.2.3.2 PURPOSE The aim of the present study is to set up a taxonomy of discourse markers as well as to provide a detailed and systematic study of their use in aca-

< previous page

page_26

next page >

< previous page

page_27

next page >

Page 27 demic text. It is therefore not necessary for the corpora to be fully representative of academic language as a whole; nor is it indispensable for them to have the same size. The corpora merely need to contain a sufficiently large number of tokens of any category of discourse marker in the languages under investigation. This raises questions about the adequate size of the corpus, and the range of text types to be covered. 1.2.2.3.3 CORPUS SIZE Just as corpus work usually proceeds in an iterative cycle (see Section 1.1), so too does corpus construction (cf. Biber 1993): to ensure that the size of the academic corpora fitted the purpose of the present study, a number of pre-tests had to be carried out at various stages of the compilation process. These pre-tests were based on a wide range of items taken from an extensive list of discourse markers I had compiled manually over the years. The establishment of such an inventory of scholarly metadiscourse had long been a research interest of mine, arising from a simple didactic desire: helping myself and others to write English, French and German in an authentic, correct and sufficiently sophisticated manner. The inventory data were collected during the six years of my studies and beyond, as I happened upon them in scholarly treatises, academic textbooks and popular scientific works.13 Initially, a separate inventory was developed for each language. A number of correspondences then almost automatically forced themselves on my mind as the monolingual collections grew in size. Part of the rationale behind the present corpus compilation project is to check, with regard to some types and tokens of discourse markers, whether the matches thus obtained are viable. Two questions then arise: 1. How much text have I read over the years? 2. How reliable and representative have my notes been? It is, of course, impossible to answer these questions exactly. As already noted, humans generally read for content rather than form, and since their eyes tend to alight on odd or felicitous turns of phrase rather than common-or-garden wordings, it seems arguable that some tokens of discourse markers will have been missed in the course of such reading. Even allowing for human fallibility, though, it is evident that the amount of text I have scanned by eye over the years is at least equivalent to, if not larger than, the 30-million-word academic corpora assembled for the purposes of this study. This becomes apparent when we translate the usual word measure into more familiar terms: 30 million words of text correspond roughly to a body of 240 medium-sized books or 150 voluminous doctoral theses (Ball 1996). It is a good guess that normally gifted students get through at least half that amount in the course of their studies. The aforementioned pre-tests showed that a 10-million-word academic corpus is large enough to provide a substantial number of instances of multi-word discourse markers which can usefully, if not quite exhaustively,

< previous page

page_27

next page >

< previous page

page_28

next page >

Page 28 fill out the picture emerging from manual analysis. A fully exhaustive description would require corpora larger by at least one order of magnitude; but to date no such corpora have been assembled. Accordingly, it was felt desirable to increase the size of the corpora with a view to increasing their representativeness. The growing availability of electronic text made it possible to increase corpus size for the academic corpora to around 30 million words for French and German, and 50 million words for English. While it would have been easy to obtain a larger amount of English text at the moment of writing, the opposite is true of French and German text. Deplorable as this may be, English clearly dominates the international academic scene, and probably more than 90 per cent of all academic texts published on the Internet or on CD-ROM are in English. That said, however, it should be pointed out that the academic corpora built for this study, most especially the French and German corpora, are easily the largest and most diverse electronic archives of academic language ever created, including substantial quantities of text from various subject fields and genres. The English corpus, for example, is considerably larger than the relevant sections of the British National Corpus or the corpus used for the Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English (Biber et al. 1999). 1.2.2.3.4 TEXT TYPE AND LENGTH The text types chosen to represent academic prose were reviews, journal articles, doctoral theses and other monographs. The vast majority of the material included was literature written by specialists for specialists, with just a few articles and books intended for a wider readership. Only complete texts found their way into the corpora, with the exception of book chapters, which are usually self-contained in their discursive structure. Equally valid arguments can of course be found in favour of both sample and full-text corpora, but, as Sinclair (1991:23–24) points out, the use of sample corpora may pose problems when the analysis requires surveying large, logically connected portions of text, as in the case of discourse markers, which tend to have scope over fairly extended text spans. The actual compilation process followed a ‘clean-text’ policy (Sinclair 1991:21); that is, text was entered as it was, free of any additional analytic marks. This means that texts downloaded from the Internet may contain minute quantities of additional non-academic text such as links ( back, home, etc.), but such extraneous text is also commonly found in other types of publication. 1.2.2.3.5 TEXT CATEGORIZATION BY SUBJECT AREA A number of pre-tests confirmed my initial hypothesis that it is sensible to posit a general text type called ‘the academic text’ (see also Meyer 1996,

< previous page

page_28

next page >

< previous page

page_29

next page >

Page 29 1997). They also showed that it is possible to describe discourse-marker use on the basis of arts corpora alone, as the metalanguage used in the latter does not differ materially from that found in hard science texts, although particular items may occur with varying frequencies. Thus, items such as neυertheless, on the other hand, the same goes for or it is worth noting+ -ing were found to be equally represented in science and arts texts; items such as I/we report/describe (Hyland 1999a:118), while clearly more frequent in science texts, were found to occur with significant frequencies in arts texts as well. In line with the results of the pre-tests, a broad notion of the humanities informed the design of the three academic corpora. The domains represented in the final versions of the corpora are literature, language, history, sociology, philosophy, economics, musicology, theology, political science, education and law. The field of literature comprises literary theory and criticism, and the field of language may be further subdivided into linguistics, translation studies, classical philology and language teaching. The corpus texts were saved in separate files. Files containing texts from the same domain were given identical, selfexplanatory prefixes, e.g. ling* for linguistics and eco* for economics (where the asterisk stands for the rest of the filename). There was a dual rationale behind such codification: first, it allowed for the extraction from the full-size corpora of parallel corpora containing evenly sized sub-sections. Second, it was thought that it would enable comparison of the frequency of items across various disciplines. However, once the parallel corpora were complete, it turned out that the samples were too small to allow definitive judgements, and therefore the idea of frequency comparisons between disciplines was abandoned. My approach to text categorization was based mainly on external, non-linguistic criteria. If a text appeared in an economics journal, for example, it was classified as an economics text unless it was obvious that the text fell within the scope of another discipline; and thus for other text types as well. One final point to be considered is whether there are significant divergences between geographic varieties of academic prose. Biber et al. (1999) have shown that this is not the case for British and American English. On European and Canadian academic French the literature is silent. However, my experience of reading both varieties suggests that interlingual differences have been levelled out. 1.2.2.3.6 SOURCES AND AVAILABILITY OF ELECTRONIC TEXT Given the restricted availability of academic text on the Internet, I was forced to pursue a middle course between opportunistic and systematic sampling, with the aim of maintaining a roughly even representation of

< previous page

page_29

next page >

< previous page

page_30

next page >

Page 30 the chosen domains in the full-text corpora and with a view to the creation of the three parallel corpora discussed below. As I have argued elsewhere (Siepmann 2002b), a corpus representative of the whole language (rather than just academic English) can be built by selecting large samples of the most diverse areas of natural language use; in so doing, the corpus builder often has to proceed by trial and error, testing whether or not particular language items can be located in the corpus and, if not, adding texts in which such items can be found. In a similar vein, Stubbs (2000) points out that the construction of a representative corpus should rely on ‘largish general corpora designed according to a sociolinguistic theory of text-type variation, small specialist corpora put together (possibly temporarily) for particular knowledge domains or text-types, and very large opportunistic text collections’. It stands to reason, therefore, that large corpora drawing on a wide variety of research areas and journals should allow us to build up a reliable picture of lexical patterning in academic language. 1.2.2.3.7 BASELINE YEAR The year 1920 was taken as the baseline for the selection of published material, although less than 5 per cent of the corpus texts predate 1980. Underlying the inclusion of some older texts by accomplished stylists of previous generations was the assumption that many younger writers of English fail to maintain sufficient clarity and sophistication of expression, and that the language of today may be enriched through the language of yesteryear. 1.2.2.4 The parallel corpora and the multilingual translation corpus In recent years a number of translation corpora have been compiled with a view to promoting cross-linguistic study and/or language teaching. A translation corpus consists of original texts in one language and their translations into one or more other languages. Among the more prominent examples of translation corpora are the EnglishNorwegian Parallel Corpus (Johansson and Hofland 1994), the emerging English-German Parallel Corpus14 and the multilingual translation corpus employed in this study, which, apart from English, French and German texts, also includes material in Spanish, Portuguese and Italian. It is here used as a basis for comparing discourse-marker use in some academic texts and their translations (see Section 4.2). Apart from scholarly prose, the corpus comprises a variety of text categories from both fictional and non-fictional sources, including for example the well-known French comic Tintin, but excluding drama and verse. Work with translation corpora has brought the realization that a variety of factors militate against their use as the only source of cross-linguistic

< previous page

page_30

next page >

< previous page

page_31

next page >

Page 31 evidence. Some of these concern any study dealing with contrastive linguistics and translation; others are specific to the present research: • The reliability of the translation corpus as a source of cross-linguistic evidence stands or falls on the quality of the translations. There are two types of evidence to suggest that the latter is not as high as it could be: academic translation criticism has shown many translations to be either flawed or skewed along a number of linguistic dimensions (e.g. House 1997), and this assessment has been confirmed by investigations into corpora comprising either source texts and their translations (Johansson and Hofland 1994; Johansson and Oksefjell 1998) or original texts and translated texts drawn from similar areas (Laviosa-Braithwaite 1996; Kenny 1997). It has been found that the average published translation either exhibits features traceable to source language interference or exaggerates typical features of the target language (Baker 1996), so that it may be justifiable to characterize the language produced by at least some translators as a ‘third code’ (Øveras 1996). • The other main reason why translation corpora cannot be the sole source of evidence in research such as this is a pragmatic one. It is that the only moderate frequency of multi-word items makes it necessary to base the research on corpora of at least several million words, and it is well-nigh impossible to find, let alone scan, a sufficiently large number of academic texts that exist as either originals or translations in all three languages involved. By contrast, parallel corpora, which contain evenly sized sections of particular text types from several languages, allow us to make a reliable comparison of authentic language use that is free from the distorting influence of ‘translationese’. But they are not without their problems either. One difficulty is that, when aiming at a multi-million word corpus, it is impossible to obtain full equivalence between corpora. Gabel (2000) suggests that parallel corpora should be equivalent with respect to the number and type of texts as well as their length. While this is fairly easy to achieve in Gabel’s study of e-mail communication, which uses a very small database, it is both impossible and unnecessary to control for such variables as age and curriculum vitae in a large-scale study of academic language such as this. Also, there is too much variation between individual texts for complete equivalence to be achieved in the types and lengths of texts. A compromise must therefore be struck between the desirable and the feasible; in the present study comparability of corpora is taken to denote equivalence in terms of overall corpus size and the proportion of text representing each discipline. In addition, it might be argued that there is a homogeneity of background among the contributors to the corpus in the sense that all of them have completed a tertiary-level course of study.

< previous page

page_31

next page >

< previous page

page_32

next page >

Page 32 Table 1.9 Composition of the Parallel Corpus English section French section Discipline Word count Discipline Word count Sociology 1,533,778Sociology 1,598,043 Philosophy 1,289,347Philosophy 1,264,218 Political Science 427,510Political Science 387,463 Linguistics, Language Teaching 3,345,090 (Literature:Linguistics, Language Teaching 3,276,226 (Literature: and Literature 971,526) and Literature 885,798) Economics and Business 1,254,892Economics and Business 1,330,561 Management Management History 611,258History 591,282 Law 204,558Law 207,856 Theology 690,216Theology 685,760 Reviews 181,608Reviews 196,033 Total 9,538,257Total 9,537,442 German section Discipline Word count Sociology 1,575,472 Philosophy 1,295,949 Political Science 361,055 Linguistics, Language Teaching and Literature 3,285,948 (Literature: 861,224) Economics and Business Management 1,212,145 History 585,633 Law 181,619 Theology 815,622 Reviews 224,667 Total 9,538,110

< previous page

page_32

next page >

< previous page

page_33

next page >

Page 33 A second problem with parallel corpora is that the decision on what to compare is left to the analyst’s semanticpragmatic intuitions. In this study, however, it is based on a pre-established list of categories arising from long years of manual searches. Another much-discussed problem is that any statistical statement based on a corpus is inherently a ‘stochastic construct’ (Gabel 2000:125). This is particularly problematic when, as in Gabel (2000), learner corpora are compared with native-speaker corpora with a view to determining the nature of the learners’ interlanguage (for the simple reason that it presupposes an idealized learner), but much less so in the case of large collections of native language use which are tapped to obtain information on the forms and functions of phraseological units in various languages, as in the present study. Indeed, such corpora allow us to generalize across the countervailing tendencies usually observed in any natural language, thus helping us to substantiate or refute many claims in the contrastivist literature which were made on the basis of impressionistic evidence. For example, the claim that French writers make more extensive use of connectors than German writers has been elevated to almost dogmatic status in comparative stylistics, although there is some evidence to the contrary (Gallagher 1995). By balancing out individual differences large corpora place us in a position to decide such issues with greater certainty. If it were found, for example, that, on average, French academic texts do indeed contain a comparatively larger number of multi-word markers, and that native-speaker readers find such texts easier to process, then this would have clear implications for the teaching of writing and translation: for example, English and German learners of French would have to be taught strategies for making sense relations explicit that they normally leave unexpressed in their native languages. Table 1.9 shows the composition of the parallel corpus used in this study. 1.2.3 Text analysis Text analysis was based on a range of utility programs. The academic corpora were mainly interrogated with the help of the WordSmith Concordancer (Oxford University Press). Two other corpus-enquiry tools were used for particular purposes: Microconcord for word counts and Multiconcord for investigating the Multilingual Translation Corpus (see p. 24). The use of cryptography in preparing texts for encyclopaedias makes it impossible to use the usual text analysis software for searching such reference works. Thus the Encyclopaedia Britannica must be searched using the Netscape Navigator, and the French and German reference works cited above also come with their own restricted search facilities.

< previous page

page_33

next page >

< previous page

page_34

next page >

Page 34 2 Investigating routines Defining and describing multi-word discourse markers A definition is the enclosing a wilderness of idea within a wall of words. Samuel Butler, Notebooks Meyer (1996) has shown that non-specialist lexis is fundamentally, if somewhat paraxodically, constitutive of academic text. Among the components of such general or ‘procedural’ (Widdowson 1983) vocabulary, speech acts and their results figure prominently, helping as they do to construct a ‘pragmatic skeleton’ (Meyer 1996:186) fleshed out with the entities, ideas and activities that form the conceptual content of text. More crucially, they play an essential role in establishing what is known as ‘reflexivity’, i.e. the ways in which language is used to refer to or describe itself (Lyons 1977:5). Much of the non-specialist lexis in question consists of chunked wholes which can be readily, and often unconsciously, brought to mind by educated native speakers of a language. As indicated in the previous chapter, the present work deals with one class of such prepackaged phrases, for which the intuitive label ‘multi-word discourse marker’ suggests itself—a notion which will have to be sharpened in the following pages. To get our discussion on a concrete footing, let us consider a French linguistics text illustrating the use of such markers in academic discourse: Si, en l’état de nos connaissances, il est difficile d’envisager un enseignement directif et systématique de la compétence linguistique, cette constatation est encore plus frappante pour la compétence discursive. Même s’il existe une longue tradition de réflexion sur le discours dans le cadre de la rhétorique, l’étude systématique des structures du discours a commencé seulement dans les années soixante-dix. Rappelons qu’il y a moins de trente ans, Benveniste concluait un article dans la revue Langages par l’affirmation de la nécessité d’aborder l’étude systématique des structures du dialogue (cf. Benveniste 1970), ce qui témoigne de l’état rudimentaire des connaissances au moment où on commençait à parler pourtant de

< previous page

page_34

next page >

< previous page

page_35

next page >

Page 35 compétence de communication. Quels que soient les progrès, souvent marquants, réalisés depuis dans la description de l’organisation du discours, nos connaissances sont encore trop réduites et trop partielles pour fonder un enseignement directif et systématique de la compétence discursive. On pourrait conclure de ce qui précède que nous sommes totalement démunis par rapport à l’objectif, que tous les intéressés s’accordent à considérer comme primordial, d’amener l’apprenant à la maîtrise d’une compétence discursive. Ce n’est heureusement pas le cas. Il suffit, pour s’en assurer, de revenir à l’observation, qui relève du savoir commun, sur la capacité des apprenants d’acquérir spontanément une compétence linguistique et une compétence discursive en langue maternelle ou en langue seconde dans la communauté où cette langue est utilisée. Les recherches récentes, en particulier dans le champ de la grammaire générative transformationnelle, ont montré que les apprenants avaient la capacité d’acquérir des structures grammaticales beaucoup plus complexes… On peut donc supposer, même si les études dans ce domaine sont moins avancées, que la capacité des apprenants d’acquérir une compétence discursive en langue maternelle ou en langue seconde va bien au-delà des capacités des spécialistes de décrire l’organisation du discours. Ceci dit, il n’est guère possible de reproduire complètement, dans la classe de langue maternelle, une situation d’apprentissage naturel de compétences avancées comme la participation à une négociation commerciale ou à une séance de comité… Les expériences toujours plus nombreuses d’enseignement par immersion ne proposent qu’une simulation partielle, dans l’espace et dans le temps, qui ne peut dispenser d’une certaine forme d’enseignement. Il faut donc concevoir, en langue maternelle comme en langue seconde, ce qu’on appelle précisément depuis quelques années un enseignement-apprentissage, fondé à la fois sur la capacité d’apprentissage des apprenants et sur un apport pédagogique des enseignants et des modes d’enseignement. (Roulet 2000) From a linguist’s perspective, there are several interesting facts about the markers exemplified above. The first thing to be said is that all of them—with the exception perhaps of ce qu’on appelle—are connectors of one sort or another. Most of them indicate that the writer is moving on to another stage of his argument or making an additional point; typical examples are il suffit, pour s’en assurer, de and on peut donc supposer que, the first introducing anecdotal evidence for the preceding statement, the second initiating a discussion of the implications of the previous discourse. There is thus a

< previous page

page_35

next page >

< previous page

page_36

next page >

Page 36 clear case for establishing a parallel between these multi-word expressions and the forms traditionally identified as discourse markers. Both can only be properly accounted for if considered from an intersentential or textual perspective; they are ‘eminently text-linguistic problems’ (Söll 1985:163) which only detailed corpus evidence can elucidate. Structurally, it turns out that we are not dealing with a unified phenomenon. The markers in question cut across the whole spectrum of word combinations, ranging from individual words (donc; and, actually, but, howeυer) through immutable phrases (I mean, you see, for example, what else) , variable phrases (ceci dit, en l’état de nos connaissances; to cut a long story short) and set expressions (ce n’est pas le cas; only oυer my dead body) all the way to clauses (on pourrait conclure de ce qui précède que; as I haυe said) and sentence-like units (this is not the whole story, though);1 indeed, as some further examples show (an example is proυided by; dabei ist zu bedenken, dass; cela implique que) many of them are not structurally complete. Markers of the type force est de constater, for example, are formed from the fixed sentence stem force est de plus a restricted choice of verbs ( constater, reconnaître, ajouter, etc.); the resultant structure can be followed by a direct object or a complement clause starting with que. Similarly, with on peut supposer que we have a pronominal subject followed by a verb phrase plus the start of a complement clause, and with ce qu’on appelle or ce qu’il est conυenu d’appeler we have fragmentary relative clauses. In this connection we might also make the observation that many of the word groupings in question can be regarded as extended collocations. Consider, for example, a sentence stem such as cette constation est encore plus frappante pour, built around the noun-adjective collocation constat(ation)+frappant. Furthermore, the extract illustrates the significantly dense use of these markers in academic text; similar observations could be made for journalistic texts. A rough indication of the statistical significance of word groupings (Jones and Sinclair 1974) can be obtained by comparing the number of actual occurrences with the likelihood of their occurring by chance. A word grouping is statistically significant if the probability of its chance occurrence is sufficiently low. Several measures of such statistical significance have evolved which are mutually illuminating. The most commonly used of these are z-score, t-score and mutual information (Barnbrook 1996:94ff.): z-score, for example, denotes ‘the difference between observed and expected frequencies expressed as a number of standard deviations’ (Barnbrook 1996:96). For our purposes, it seems sufficient to compare raw frequency figures for a phrase such as ceci dit (see Table 2.1). The calculation in Table 2.1 shows that, in a randomly organized corpus composed of the same words as NF, one would expect to find only one co-occurrence of the words ceci and dit, their actual frequency, however, is 95. Similar differences between observed and expected frequencies could be calculated for the other phrases exemplified above.

< previous page

page_36

next page >

< previous page

page_37

next page >

Page 37 Table 2.1 Observed and expected frequencies of ceci dit in NF Expected frequency of ceci+dit in NF ( E=f[ceci=1925]/corpus size×f [dit= Obserυed frequency of ceci+dit in NF 53157])/corpus size=ƒ (ceci) ƒ (dit)/ Corpus size 2) ( frequency [ceci dit]/corpus size ) 0.0000000102327225 (i.e. 1 in 100 million) 0.00000095 (i.e. 95 in 100 million) Linguistic intuitions about the significance of such word groupings thus find confirmation in statistical fact. Lastly, it is important to note that recurrent multi-word expressions and common first-level markers may be strung together (on peut donc supposer que), and that several second-level markers may occur in sequence (Ce n’est heureusement pas le cas. Il suffit, pour s’en assurer, de+INF) . The foregoing observations provide us with a crude approximation to a definition of multi-word markers. A more precise definition will be attempted in the rest of this chapter. I shall aim to mark off the word combinations under discussion from other types of phraseology by applying criteria related to their pragmatic function (Section 2.1), lexico-semantic structure and frequency of occurrence (Section 2.2). Section 2.3 will attempt to bring some order into the intuitive structural classification just made. 2.1 Pragmatic perspectives on discourse markers In the preceding section the intuitive notion ‘multi-word discourse marker’ was employed to refer to such conventionalized language chunks as il suffit, pour s’en assurer, de+INF, and some initial evidence was provided to justify its use. This section attempts to sharpen the notion by arguing that the term ‘discourse marker’ can be applied to both written and spoken language (Section 2.1.1) and that discourse markers can carry pragmatic as well as propositional meaning (Section 2.1.2). A simple, albeit methodologically invalid, reason for using the term ‘discourse marker’ may be the desire not to add to the flood of terminology threatening to submerge language science. The term, probably coined by Labov and Fanshel (1977:156), has come to be the commonest designation for a rag-bag of seemingly empty expressions variously known as fillers (Brown and Yule 1983), Flickwörter, Gliederungssignale (Gülich 1970), comment clauses (Quirk et al. 1985), discourse-deictic items (Levinson 1983), pragmatic markers (Brinton 1996), discourse connectiυes (Warner 1985), cue phrases (Grosz and Sidner 1986), lexical phrases (Nattinger and De Carrico 1992), organizers (Nattinger and De Carrico 1992) or marker words (BBC World Serυice English Language Teaching); and the list might even be extended. The study of such items has been actively pursued at least

< previous page

page_37

next page >

< previous page

page_38

next page >

Page 38 since Gülich’s (1970) seminal thesis on the ‘macro-syntax of signalling devices in spoken French’ (‘Makrosyntax der Gliederungssignale im gesprochenen Französisch’). So far the emphasis has been firmly on oral discourse, as reflected in the following dictionary definitions: Special attention has been focused on discourse markers—sequentially dependent elements which demarcate units of speech, such as oh, well and I mean. (Crystal 1997:118–119) A word or phrase which helps to signal the direction in which language, particularly in a conversation, is going. The term is somewhat specialized and not easily defined, but may include not only (a) conjunctions (e.g. and, but, or, because, etc.) but also (b) words outside the main syntax, such as oh, well, you see, I mean, etc. Words and phrases in this second group are sometimes labelled FILLERS or pragmatic particles. (Chalker and Weiner 1994:119) It is interesting to note that Crystal (1997), borrowing from Schiffrin (1987), reserves the term exclusively for speech, while Chalker and Weiner (1994) appear to make some allowance for the written language (‘particularly in a conversation’). 2.1.1 Spoken υs. written discourse marker use There are, in fact, numerous points of contact between discourse marker use in spoken and written texts. For instance, the somewhat cumbersome topic shifter it may be noted in passing that, peculiar to written, or written-tobe-spoken register, may be said to parallel closely the use of incidentally in everyday speech or writing. To take a concrete example, note how in the following stretch of everyday speech the discourse marker ‘incidentally’ signals a topic shift: ‘I did teach English from American textbooks in America. Incidentally, I just talked my RP out in Labrador where they had a strong local Labrador Canadian accent’ (Lenk 1998:218). In a written text, a possible sequence built around similar content might read: There was strong emphasis on American textbooks and American English. (It may be noted in passing that the author lost his British accent when staying in Labrador.) Conversely, the qualifier haυing said that, common in the spoken language, is often recast more succinctly as this said or that said in the written language, while retaining its function. It thus appears that the omnibus term ‘discourse marker’ can be correctly and usefully applied to both spoken and written language although many linguists prefer to reserve ‘discourse’ for the former. Of course, this is not to deny that different types of discourse markers

< previous page

page_38

next page >

< previous page

page_39

next page >

Page 39 may be used in oral and written discourse (Schiffrin 1987). But a moment’s reflection will allow us to see that the degree of overlap is much greater than generally assumed. In addition to the above-cited examples, consider English markers such as of course, in fact or in any case, French markers such as justement, franchement or en fait and German markers such as etwa, jedenfalls or immerhin, all of which are common in both speech and writing. Significantly also, the present research is not alone in including written items in the category of discourse markers. There is firm evidence from a study of old, middle and early modern English (Brinton 1996) that discourse markers have always played a major role in written narratives, where they serve, among other things, to mark points of transition or to foreground important events. With reference to present-day French, Spanish and Italian, Gil (1995) has shown that both linking and stance adverbials have a pivotal function in written text. Of a piece with such views is Nattinger and DeCarrico’s (1992) study of lexical phrases in contemporary English, which discusses both spoken and written uses of such items. Nattinger and DeCarrico (1992:90, 104) distinguish between micro- and macroorganizers, ‘organizer’ being synonymous with ‘discourse marker’ in their terminology. 2.1.2 Pragmatic υs. propositional meaning More broadly, any attempt at defining discourse markers must answer the question of whether particular discourse markers should be excluded from consideration on the ground that they carry no pragmatic meaning. Lenk (1998:39), for example, argues that ‘structural phrases’ such as on the one hand as well as ‘propositional uses’ of particles such as anyway do not fit the bill because they ‘have a structuring function…which corresponds to their lexical meaning, whereas the structuring functions of discourse markers…correspond…to a pragmatic meaning’ (her emphases). This argument, however, is never bolstered up by conclusive evidence. True, it is quite possible, as Lenk (1998:55ff., 216) suggests, to establish a workable distinction between (a) the propositional use of a particle like anyway to modify a preceding statement, and (b) its use as a discourse marker in returning to a previous topic after a digression; witness the following: (a) Then I shared a flat with her. Well, then, I was somewhere else, for the whole of nineteen-seventy, anyway. (b) And at the table there were two women sitting there. Well, they were attractive women, the one had on a real, real short skirt. Anyway, there was this guy in his fifties… (Lenk 1998:216)

< previous page

page_39

next page >

< previous page

page_40

next page >

Page 40 In (a) anyway, equivalent to French en tout cas and German jedenfalls, modifies the prepositional phrase ‘for the whole of nineteen-seventy’, restricting the generality of ‘I was somewhere else’. This might be said to be a propositional use of the word. In (b), it acts as a discourse marker rechannelling the conversation back into its earlier course. Very often, though, the distinction between lexical and pragmatic meaning becomes blurred. The German focusing adverb sogar is a case in point. As Courdier et al. (1994:19–20) note, an utterance like ‘sogar Peter hat die Wahrheit gesagt’ clearly allows truth-conditional treatment, asserting (a) that Peter has told the truth and (b) that at least one other person has told the truth. This is accomplished by what has just been referred to as the ‘lexical meaning’ of sogar . Yet it is evident that, over and above this denotative sense, use of sogar also conveys the speaker’s attitude towards the state of affairs under discussion. He or she must have thought it very unlikely that Peter would tell the truth and now finds it all the more remarkable that it turned out that way. Thus, sogar has both a pragmatic and a literal meaning, and the two shades of meaning usually occur in combination. Lenk’s own exemplification might in fact be queried, since the meaning of a lexical phrase such as on the other hand cannot be derived from its constituents. The phrase has acquired a figurative meaning similar to that of by contrast. Its literal meaning could be exemplified by a sentence such as on one hand he had paint, on the other hand he had blood. With discourse devices in academic language, the same thin line separates lexical from pragmatic meaning. For the sake of illustration, consider the French evaluator il y a plus. In its literal sense this phrase communicates little more than an addition or the announcement thereof, with possible renderings such as but this is not all or there is more in English and das ist noch nicht alles or dazu kommt, dass in German.2 But in argumentation the phrase can take on an additional sense, as evidenced in the following extract from Le Monde: L’intérêt fut de courte durée, du fait que la nature des postes proposés, mais aussi de la perte de rémunération que ce CES [contrat emploi-solidarité, D.S.] ne manqua pas d’occasionner à des adultes qui, pour la plupart, avaient connu des expériences de travail où, même si les salaires n’étaient pas énormes, ils étaient au moins égaux à un SMIC. Mais en 1991 et en 1992, on était prêt à prendre ce CES puisqu’il s’agissait d’une parenthèse dans la vie d’adulte en attendant la reprise. On sait ce qu’il advint de la reprise en 1993. Il y a plus. La boulimie du CES s’attaque désormais au secteur de l’insertion par l’économique jusqu’alors secteur autonome de l’insertion des publics en difficulté. Les entreprises d’insertion, les associations intermédiaires, les régies de quartiers représentent des figures diverses de l’insertion par l’économique et, de ce fait, ont toutes un rapport différent à la mesure CES. Si les entreprises d’insertion, qui

< previous page

page_40

next page >

< previous page

page_41

next page >

Page 41 demeurent des entreprises comme les autres et qui occupent des créneaux de l’économie marchande, ne doivent pas employer de salariés sous statut CES, les associations intermédiaires qui agissent davantage dans le secteur non marchand peuvent, lorsque l’initiative privée est absente, recourir à la mesure CES. Mais les représentants légitimes de ces initiatives de lutte contre l’exclusion ont toujours affirmé que la mesure CES était un des moments d’un parcours d’insertion et non un instrument en soi. En outre, particulièrement pour les entreprises d’insertion, ces CES devaient rester l’exception… ( Le Monde, 26.10.94:4; my emphasis) In the article in question Jacques Dughera submits to searching criticism the job creation scheme (‘contrat emploisolidarité’) introduced by the then French government led by Edouard Balladur. Here the pragmatic function of il y a plus is to signal a gradation in the speaker’s line of argument, the components of which are structured in ascending order of seriousness. The device provides an effective transition from Dughera’s consideration of the plight of individual participants in the scheme to his discussion of its overall impact on various economic agents, a theme which he clearly regards as more important. The kind of gradational semantic prosody (Sinclair 1991; Louw 1993; Stubbs 1995; see Chapter 1) here surrounding il y a plus seems to be a common feature of its use. This is especially true of its cooccurrences with mais. Of a further ten occurrences I looked at, six showed the same pattern. In the case under discussion, this clearly suggests partial synonymity with il y a plus graυe, leading to alternative renderings such as more seriously or schlimmer noch . Another point to remember is that the relative lack of propositional content found with many markers is due to diachronic change. It is the recurrence of a particular unit in a particular type of context that leads to its evolving into a discourse marker, a process which German linguists such as Burger (1998:15) have referred to as ‘Phraseologisierung’ (‘phraseologicization’). We must therefore conclude that Lenk’s (1998) arguments afford little reason, especially with respect to discourse marker use in written language, to draw strict lines between pragmatic meaning on the one hand and literal meaning on the other. Lenk is nevertheless making an important point, albeit unwittingly: what distinguishes discourse markers from collocations is precisely the fact that the former assume pragmatic functions in discourse which, as the example of il y a plus has shown, are often a matter of convention. 2.1.3 Extralinguistic υs. intralinguistic features If we accept that discourse markers mark relationships between text spans, then it seems reasonable to suggest that they may include extralinguistic

< previous page

page_41

next page >

< previous page

page_42

next page >

Page 42 text features such as headings or indentations. This insight has led some German LSP scholars to extend further the field of enquiry here discussed. In the German literature ‘Gliederungssignal’, or ‘signalling device’, is often used synonymously with the term ‘Diskursmarker’, whose definition tends towards all-inclusiveness: generic term for words or phrases used to structure discourse, such as nonsentences (e.g. interjections, signalling devices), syntactic constructions (e.g. left dislocation) or syntactically dependent elements (e.g. conjunctions, modal particles). They perform a variety of functions. (Bußmann 1990:190; my translation) Thus, Baumann (1987, 1992) regards as a signalling device any linguistic and extralinguistic marker contributing to textual progression and distinguishes between the social, functional-communicative, communicative-pragmatic and semantic dimensions of signalling devices (1987:9; 1992:86). He suggests that the kind of communicative strategy the author adopts determines linguistic choices, and that these in turn determine the use of particular communicative-pragmatic signalling devices. Visible at the text surface are at least eight types of signalling device: 1 metacommunicative text segments of some length (e.g. ‘For this purpose I shall look closely at…’) 2 rhetorical figures such as anaphora 3 sentence adverbs (e.g. similarly ) 4 sentence openers (e.g. to begin, note that ) 5 sequence signals (e.g. in the first place) 6 ‘signalling devices proper’ (e.g. either…or ) 7 sentence closers (e.g. finally, after all) 8 (sub)headings (Baumann 1992:93–95; my translation) Unfortunately, Baumann only provides two or three examples of each category, so that it is questionable whether his classification adequately captures the full range of signalling devices. For instance, only one kind of text/the other kind of text and either/or exemplify category 6 (‘signalling devices proper’), and Baumann’s definition is not much help in identifying other potential elements of the class: Signalling devices proper highlight the (alternative, adversative, additive, etc.) relations of interdependence between those aspects of the discourse topic which are germane to understanding its content and following its logic. (Baumann 1992:94; my translation)

< previous page

page_42

next page >

< previous page

page_43

next page >

Page 43 This begs a number of questions, including what is meant by the term aspect (Aspekt) here, and why sentence adverbs such as similarly are seen as forming a group of their own rather than belonging to this one. It is also extremely doubtful whether rhetorical figures can be counted among discourse markers. The kind of syntactic parallelism involved in anaphora, for instance, may well lend emphasis to the current discourse, but, being a syntactic figure, it does not cue any specific conjunctive relation. The most serious flaw in Baumann’s work, however, is that he fails to provide sample analyses that would demonstrate the viability of his approach. In particular, there is no demonstration of how to classify the discoursal functions of extralinguistic markers. It is contended here that such classification is both impossible and undesirable. Impossible because such extralinguistic features as headings, while exhibiting a limited number of syntactic realizations, are semantically extremely variable. Undesirable because, even if a classification were possible, this would be so large as to be unmanageable. In other words, Baumann’s classification has the clear disadvantage of transcending the boundaries of what is measurable in linguistic research and applicable in pedagogic practice. 2.1.4 Towards a consensual definition So far we have put forward a variety of arguments in support of claiming that discourse markers can be defined as linguistic expressions of varying length which carry pragmatic and/or propositional meaning, occur in both speech and writing, and facilitate rather than disrupt discourse. We shall now consider some additional criteria, borrowed from the literature on oral discourse markers, which may contribute to a consensual definition. The lowest common denominator of a wide variety of definitions lies in the recognition that discourse markers serve to indicate how one unit of discourse is to be construed in the light of another (see Oates 1999; Risselada and Spooren 1998; Millis et al. 1995). The key role thus attributed to coherence relations is reflected in Risselada and Spooren’s definition: Discourse markers can be defined as those natural language expressions whose primary function is to facilitate the process of interpreting the coherence relation(s) between a particular unit of discourse and other, surrounding units and/or aspects of the communicative situation. (Risselada and Spooren 1998:132) Risselada and Spooren observe that this definition would ideally require a highly evolved theory of coherence, but that in practice research into discourse devices and into models of discourse coherence is complementary. Notice that the definition is sufficiently broad to be in conformity with our

< previous page

page_43

next page >

< previous page

page_44

next page >

Page 44 list of criterial features (see pp. 37–43). In particular, it may be taken to refer to both speech and writing, leaving room for items of varying length and functionality and enabling us to regard multi-word discourse markers as a subclass of the general class of discourse markers. Many of the more consensual features that emerge from the literature are reflected in this definition. Of crucial import are Risselada and Spooren’s references to ‘a particular unit of discourse and other surrounding units’ as well as to ‘aspects of the communicative situation’. They allow them to take account of the two fundamental functions of discourse markers, which are usually simultaneously present: the discoursal/textual function on the one hand and the interpersonal function on the other. Again, these functions are given different names by different authors: Östman (1982), for example, speaks of the ‘textual’ and ‘pragmatic’ functions, whereas Schiffrin (1987) recognizes a ‘textindexing’ and a ‘participant-indexing’ function. Simply stated, the textual function of discourse markers is to signal relations between prior, present and subsequent discourse, marking off one discourse unit (i.e. in the terminology here used: elements, sequences and text segments) from another or linking discourse units further apart (see the introduction to this chapter). It is this textual function of discourse markers that was captured by early discourse analysts in terms such as ‘Eröffnungssignal’, ‘Unterbrechungssignal’ and ‘Schlußsignal’ (Gülich 1970). Later authors such as Schiffrin (1987) prefer terms that take speaker/ hearer and writer/reader interaction into account, thus emphasizing the interpersonal function of discourse markers. As the term suggests, the interpersonal function consists in expressing speaker or writer stance or in securing cooperation and understanding. In speech, for example, discourse markers assist in turn-taking; in writing they help to create a seemingly dialogic interaction between reader and writer. Another generally accepted feature of discourse markers is the heterogeneity of their morphosyntactic realizations. The set of discourse markers as a whole does not constitute a word class in the traditional sense of the term because there are no morphosyntactic or semantic criteria allowing us to delimit it, any more than there are criteria for unambiguously attributing all individual members of the set to specific word classes. Since our concern is with markers in written text, we here refrain from further discussion of the morphosyntactic and prosodic features of oral discourse markers (see Quirk et al. 1985:1112; Crystal and Davy 1975:90; Helbig 1988:32–34; Courdier et al. 1994:26–31). A final feature of discourse markers that most of the relevant studies draw attention to is their multifunctionality. Oral discourse markers have been shown to operate on the syntactico-semantic and pragmatic levels simultaneously (Schiffrin 1987), and individual markers such as actually and ja have been suggested to cover a range of distinct functions (Lenk

< previous page

page_44

next page >

< previous page

page_45

next page >

Page 45 1998; Courdier et al. 1998). One might be tempted to think that such plurality of functions gives rise to misunderstandings, but disambiguation is usually achieved through the contextual embedding of the marker. To summarize: the term ‘discourse marker’ can be applied to natural-language strings of varying length and morphosyntactic structure whose primary function is to signal the coherence relations obtaining between a particular unit of discourse and other, surrounding units and/or aspects of the communicative situation and thereby to facilitate the listener’s or reader’s processing task. While we have now arrived at a fairly comprehensive definition of discoursal and pragmatic features of discourse markers, we still need some way of marking the cut-off point between what we have intuitively termed ‘multi-word discourse markers’, on the one hand, and roughly synonymous word combinations of a less restricted nature on the other. This lexicological issue is the subject of the next section. 2.2 Lexicological perspectives on multi-word discourse markers Our discussion so far has focused on pragmatic and discoursal criteria for defining the general class of discourse markers. Henceforth our task will be to determine the lexicological features of multi-word discourse markers. To do so, it will be necessary first to review some of the major approaches to classifying word groupings. 2.2.1 The phraseological cline Traditional approaches to the classification of multi-word units assume that there is a fairly sharp cut-off point between non-compositional, or idiomatic, and compositional, or non-idiomatic, word sequences. Thus, for example, Dobrovol’skij (1995) distinguishes between free word associations and phraseology, subdividing the latter class into idiomatic and non-idiomatic phraseology. Along the same lines, Hausmann (e.g. 1984, 1989, 1999) differentiates between fixed and non-fixed word sequences, dividing non-fixed word sequences into three groups: 1 ‘Ko-kreationen’ (co-creations) arise through the application of general syntactic and semantic rules (prächtig+Baum). 2 ‘affine Kombinationen’, or collocations, are defined by the tendency of two words, called the ‘base’ (or ‘node’) and the ‘collocate’, to co-occur; Hausmann views them as semi-prepackaged phrases that speakers do not put together creatively. The base is semantically autonomous (ascenseur), while the meaning conveyed by the collocate is dependent on its co-occurrence with the base (appeler [+ascenseur]) . 3 ‘Konter-kreationen’ (counter-creations) are word sequences serving as

< previous page

page_45

next page >

< previous page

page_46

next page >

Page 46 stylistic devices which arise from the violation of syntactic or semantic rules (les fleurs du mal). While Hausmann’s classification has the merit of accounting for unusual word combinations as ‘Konter-kreationen’, his view of collocation as a node/collocate combination (Hausmann 1985) may be too restricted.3 As a cursory inspection of any sizeable corpus will reveal, there are also a large number of multi-word collocations. Some of these, such as Aisenstadt’s (1979) verb+preposition+noun phrase groupings (leap+to+conclusion), can be viewed as two-word collocations in which the use of the preposition may be determined by either element. Others may be regarded as a combination of two or more node/collocate combinations (withdraw+money, substantial+quantities →to withdraw substantial quantities of money). Yet others, however, are so fixed that they will usually be perceived and stored as one unit, as shown in Table 2.2. It is wiser, therefore, to have recourse to the Firthian view of collocation (Firth 1957), which does not limit collocation to the co-occurrence of two words.4 This has recently found its fittest expression in Sinclair’s (1991:173) idiom principle, whereby ‘the choice of one word affects the choice of others in its vicinity’. While this feature of natural language has been remarked upon by many writers, of whom Bally (1909) may have been the first, Sinclair was probably the first to recognize its pervasiveness. He illustrates it with examples such as the following: a. Many phrases have an indeterminate extent. As an example, consider set eyes on. This seems to attract a pronoun subject, and either neυer or a temporal conjunction like the moment, the first time, and the word has as an auxiliary to set. […] e. Many uses of words and phrases attract other words in strong collocation; for example, hard work, hard luck, hard facts, hard evidence. […] g. Many uses of words and phrases show a tendency to occur in a certain semantic environment. For example, the verb happen is associated with unpleasant things—accidents and the like. (Sinclair 1991:111–112) Table 2.2 Multi-word collocations (for further examples, see Siepmann 2002b) English French German not+forget+in a hurry ne pas+oublier+de sitôt nicht+so schnell+vergessen hold+road+well tenir+route+bien gut+Straßenlage+haben (cf. *eine Straßenlage haben) not wildly (startlingly) original pas follement original nicht wahnsinnig originell You can’t be too careful. On n’est jamais assez prudent. Man kann nie vorsichtig genug sein.

< previous page

page_46

next page >

< previous page

page_47

next page >

Page 47 There are clear echoes here of Hausmann’s ‘Affinität’, but with the difference that Hausmann’s notion is grounded in semantics rather than statistical significance and applies only to two-word combinations. Most importantly, Sinclair reminds us that collocations carry a particular semantic-pragmatic prosody (Sinclair 1996), a perception which he shares with Feilke, who views phraseology as conveying a specific type of figure-ground relation (Feilke 1996:261). That is, speakers of a language do not acquire collocations as quasi-mathematical figures (a+b), but rather as figures set against a conventional situational background (cf. j’appelle l’ascenseur, the landscape rushes by, ich erhebe das Glas). On closer examination, then, statistical probability of co-occurrence in a very large representative corpus and a redefined contextual ‘Affinität’ may well turn out to be two sides of the same coin. A more serious problem associated with traditional approaches to collocation such as Hausmann’s and Dobrovol’skij’s is that the boundary between non-compositional and compositional units has proved to be more fluid than previously assumed. There is now overwhelming evidence on the frequency of word sequences (Hunston and Francis 2000:230–235) showing that the primary division between collocations and non-collocations is a matter of more or less rather than yes or no. For example, depending on the size and content of the corpus, a word sequence such as book+proclaim may be viewed either as a free combination or a collocation. According to Hunston and Francis (2000:132) the Bank of English has 15 instances of the noun book or its plural books occurring within about seven words preceding a form of proclaim . She somewhat hesitantly concludes that it ‘is not frequent enough to be a strong collocation’. However, if we consulted a large corpus comprising literary magazines we would probably find a much higher proportion of co-occurrences of book/books and proclaim, and would then be justified in calling these (subject-specific) collocations. It seems promising, then, to posit the existence of a phraseological cline (Francis 1993 for English; Siepmann 1999 and 2002b for French) running from totally fixed expressions at one end to freely generated groups of words at the other, with collocations occupying an intermediate position. Borrowing from Howarth (1996:43; 1998:169), Hausmann (1984) and classical Russian theory on degrees of idiomaticity, we may assume five ‘levels’ of fixedness, starting with the fixed end of the cline: 1 Complete restriction on the choice of any element: fixed expressions, which can be further subdivided into (a) pure (opaque) idioms (spill the beans, a dead duck) (b) figurative idioms (call the shots, a sacred cow, curry faυour). 2 Complete restriction on the choice of one element; some substitution of other elements: idiom (e.g. in fine/good fettle ) or strong collocation (pay/take heed, giυe the appearance/impression).

< previous page

page_47

next page >

< previous page

page_48

next page >

Page 48 3 Some substitution at several structural places: central restricted collocation (make/giυe a speech/presentation) . 4 Freedom of substitution of one element; some restriction on the choice of other elements: weak collocation ( accept/agree to/adopt a plan/proposal/suggestion/recommendation/conυention, etc.). 5 Freedom of substitution of any element: free combination (also called ‘non-restricted compositional sequence’) (a green wall, suggest synonymity) . 2.2.2 Pragmatic phrases and phraseological fixity Phrases assuming pragmatic functions are distributed across the entire phraseological cline. At one end are totally fixed opaque idioms such as be that as it may or es liegt auf der Hand, dass, at the other extreme we find unconventionalized clause-integrated links such as the following: Dans ce type de phrase, on fait intervenir ce que pour éviter le tour savant de l’inversion. On le retrouve d’ailleurs, non moins incorrect, dans la subordonnée interrogative. (Georgin 1961:44; my emphasis) In the present case the ready-made discourse devices il en υa de même pour or même constat pour, to name but two, may be substituted for the free syntactic string on retrouυe+direct object+preposition. This strongly suggests that we may also assign a pragmatic function to non-recurrent sequences put together by application of generative rules. Clearly, though, such non-recurrent sequences, which would come under level 5 in the above classification, do not qualify as what we have intuitively termed ‘multi-word markers’. The cut-off point between multi-word markers and roughly synonymous word combinations of a less restricted nature thus seems to be situated at level 4. Here are a few typical examples of each level: 1 be that as it may, in retrospect, with hindsight 2 ähnliches/gleiches/entsprechendes gilt für; an example is proυided/afforded by 3 to take/cite a+ADJ+case/example 4 Ähnliche Erwägungen/Überlegungen/Einschränkungen/…gelten für/in/bei The link demonstrated here between level 2 and level 4 suggests that many relatively fixed multi-word markers can be transposed to a sometimes expanded, sometimes reduced structure with a similar pragmatic function but a more precise meaning (cf. ähnliches gilt für→ähnliche Einschränkungen gelten für). These expanded or reduced structures are normally less fixed than the markers they are based on; they can best be described in terms of Altenberg’s (1984) ‘clause-integrated linkage’ or

< previous page

page_48

next page >

< previous page

page_49

next page >

Page 49 Francis’s (1994) ‘labelling discourse’. In the example just given, ähnliche Einschränkungen functions as a thematic link which retrospectively labels the preceding discourse as being of the order of restriction. Note that such labelling discourse is not normally a mere repetition or a ‘synonym’ of any preceding text element; rather it ‘is presented as equiυalent to the clause or clauses it replaces, while naming them for the first time’ (Francis 1994:85). Such attribution of equivalence is achieved by using a summative noun whose meaning signals to the reader how the preceding or subsequent discourse is to be interpreted. It would appear, then, that a relatively sharp line can be drawn between non-restricted compositional sequences, or free combinations, and multi-word discourse markers, with the interesting result that both interlingual and intralingual correspondences can be accounted for. A clear demonstration of this is in Gallagher’s (1992) study of the multi-word marker erschwerend kommt hinzu, dass (level 2) which can be intralingually expanded to sentence length to give eine weitere Schwierigkeit/ein weiteres Problem/eine weitere Komplikation/…kommt/tritt hinzu (level 4). Significantly, typical English renderings parallel this kind of expansion. Gallagher cites a further complication is that…, clearly a central restricted collocation with generative potential: another/a second/a further complication/difficulty/ problem/…is that (for full discussion, see Siepmann 2001a). A similar kind of transposition can be seen in operation with the German enumerative phrase hinzu kommt, dass and its variant dazu kommt, dass . These may be seen as fixed expressions or as strong collocations of level 1 or 2; they can be equated with the French collocation autre+noun ( autre remarque/autre illustration/autre obserυation/etc.), which is a restricted collocation of level 4. It should be mentioned in passing that a more literal rendering such as à cela s’ajoute que is also possible, but has a different stylistic value. So where one language uses a fixed expression, another may use a collocation, and vice versa. To sum up, in lexicographic terms, multi-word discourse markers can be described as collocations or fixed expressions. One final point must be made about the variability of the items under discussion; namely, that their transformation potential, though limited, appears to be a fairly good guide to distinguishing them from more clearly lexicalized markers such as on the one hand. While items such as note that are often intuited to be invariable (e.g. Swales et al. 1998), corpus searches provide evidence to the contrary; a trawl through CAE yielded the following variants of note that: Note (also/carefully/for example/further/here/too) that/note+NP Even seemingly ‘one-word’ items such as mieux and pire may lend themselves to a number of variations: mieux encore, encore mieux and pire encore, all of which contain at least two words. Conversely, items such as on the

< previous page

page_49

next page >

< previous page

page_50

next page >

Page 50 other hand, all the same and par conséquent are totally fixed. Unfortunately, though, the criterion of variability is not valid for all multi-word markers: quoi qu’il en soit and d’autre part, for example, are both invariable. This means that if we wish to include them in the category of multi-word markers we will have to invoke other criteria as well. These are the subject of the next section. 2.2.3 Variability and probability of occurrence Hitherto we have established two criterial features of what we have intuitively termed multi-word discourse markers: one discoursal (the pragmatic function of discourse markers), the other lexicological (their restricted commutability). But these two criteria alone are not sufficient to account for our intuitive grouping. For an item to qualify as a multiword discourse marker, we may surmise, also requires a specific probability of occurrence. This last step in our argument deserves more elaborate explanation. If we take the prefix ‘multi-’ to mean ‘more than one’, as do most linguists, then the welcome result is that the large group of common one-word discourse markers will remain outside the scope of our definition, But what about items like on the other hand, all the same, par conséquent, au contraire and darüber hinaus? Intuition tells us that these items, although consisting of more than one element, should really be grouped with one-word discourse markers such as but, hence, therefore, also and weiterhin . Likewise it would seem counter-intuitive to exclude the one-word items mieux or pire from the group of multi-word markers, as they belong in one semantic-pragmatic category with mieux encore, il y a plus graυe, etc. (Note that, as shown in the preceding section, the criterion of variability alone cannot account for the difference: quoi qu’il en soit and d’autre part, for example, are both invariable.) This is where probability of occurrence may be invoked as a defining criterion. Comparison of the two groups of markers by this criterion in two corpora produced the results shown in Tables 2.3, 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6. It appears that the distinction we have drawn is reasonably consistent with the evidence. In the French newspaper corpus, for instance, items such as au contraire and par conséquent are found to be at least twice as frequent as multi-word discourse markers such as plus grave or idem pour . The latter thus typically occur with frequencies of 3– 50 occurrences in 10 million words, i.e. in what one might call a medium-frequency range. Some exceptions prove the rule: note that occurs with unusual (but predictable) frequency in academic discourse. This also makes it possible to substitute a less ambiguous designation for the intuitive ‘multi-word discourse marker’, which, as we have seen, may give rise to confusion between high-frequency fixed expressions such as on the other hand and lower-frequency markers such as the fact remains

< previous page

page_50

next page >

< previous page

page_51

next page >

Page 51 Table 2.3 Frequency of ‘one-word markers’ in Le Monde (1995) Discourse marker token Frequency pourtant 7490 néanmoins 1354 au contraire 1601 par conséquent 194 Table 2.4 Frequency of ‘multi-word markers’ in Le Monde (1995) Discourse marker token Frequency mieux 88 il en υa de même (pour/de) 76 plus graυe 60 idem pour (rarely: idem en/à [followed by a place name], idem de) 38 Table 2.5 Frequency of ‘one-word markers’ in a 10-million-word section of CAE Discourse marker token Frequency howeυer 8897 neυertheless 805 on the other hand 751 in contrast/by contrast 902 Table 2.6 Frequency of ‘multi-word markers’ in a 10-million-word section of CAE Discourse marker token Frequency the fact remains that 13 note that 172 worse 43 the same goes for 5 that . Henceforth we shall use the term ‘second-level marker’, where ‘level’ is meant to refer to the level of frequency of occurrence (and not, as might be assumed, to a secondary function in structuring text). Further support for the distinction we have just established comes from translation. The French single-word item mieux, for example, translates as a multi-word item into both German (besser noch) and English (better still); darüber hinaus, a notional two-word item, may be rendered by moreoυer, further or furthermore although admittedly also by beyond this/that and in addition; English worse, when used as a marker introducing an additional

< previous page

page_51

next page >

< previous page

page_52

next page >

Page 52 adverse point, has an occasional equivalent in erschwerend kommt hinzu, dass . Given a certain number of counterexamples, it is clear that the distinction is not written in stone; rather, it is a methodological convenience. The explanation for this lies in the shared pragmatic roles of the two groups of discourse markers—something which we will enlarge on in Chapter 3. Interestingly, the above results are in keeping with the correlation between length and frequency found with fixed expressions and idioms, an area in which Moon (1998:78) makes the generalization that ‘commoner FEIs are shorter than infrequent ones’. The reasons for this must be sought in the frequency with which we need to express certain language functions. With a view to economy of effort, modern languages have evolved succinct terms for common functions. Thus, for example, we use au contraire more often than the roughly synonymous tant s’en faut or loin de là . 2.2.4 Operational definition of second-leυel discourse markers With the foregoing in mind, we can now define the term ‘second-level discourse marker’ as follows: Second-leυel discourse markers, hereafter SLDMs, are medium-frequency fixed expressions or collocations composed of two or more printed words acting as a single unit. Their function is to facilitate the process of interpreting coherence relation(s) between elements, sequences or text segments and/or aspects of the communicative situation. Succinctly put, second-level markers are recurrent multi-word combinations performing common language functions. It will be remembered that this definition is a means to an end: a methodological convenience allowing generalizations to be made about particular multi-word lexical items. As the use of the word ‘printed’ and the reference to ‘elements, sequences or text segments’ indicates, the present work confines itself to a discussion of second-level markers in written text, although second-level markers may also occur in speech. 2.3 Syntactic realizations of SLDMs Having defined the notion of SLDM, we are now ready to consider what structural types of SLDM can be made out. SLDMs are in a class of their own, somewhere between the single word and the sentence; so far there have been few attempts at categorizing such items. Since discourse markers are a subgroup of Nattinger and DeCarrico’s ‘lexical phrases’, it may be well worth looking at their classification (see Table 2.7; the examples are theirs).

< previous page

page_52

next page >

< previous page

page_53

next page >

Page 53 Table 2.7 Nattinger and DeCarrico’s classification of ‘lexical phrases’ Category Examples Polyword (invariable phrases which function like individual strictly speaking in other words at any rate what on lexical items) earth? Institutionalized Expression (invariable proverbs, aphorisms, get a life formulaics) be that as it may nice meeting you Phrasal Constraint (variable short-to-medium-length phrases) as far as I (know/can tell) as a result of… Sentence Builders (items which ‘provide a framework for it seems to me that my point here is… there’s no doubt whole sentences’) that I think Nattinger and DeCarrico (1992:46) themselves draw attention to the limitations of this taxonomy, recognizing that their categories have fuzzy edges. For example, prototypical polywords (e.g. at any rate ) will be completely invariable, whereas phrasal constraints will usually allow some variation. Between these poles, though, lies a fluid borderline, as evidenced by such polywords as for better or worse, which allows syntagmatic variation (for better or for worse) . More seriously, though, their taxonomy is based on limited linguistic data, thus providing an unrepresentative and unreliable picture of SLDMs. It therefore needs to be reconsidered in the light of a detailed corpus investigation. A particular point of contention is Nattinger and DeCarrico’s (1992:45) claim that variability of items increases as one moves along the continuum from polywords to sentence builders. While there may be a greater range of expressions to be found at the sentence builder end of the cline, some of these, like I think that or there’s no/little doubt that, admit of very little or no modification at all. Conversely, the viewpoint adjunct strictly speaking, grouped among invariable polywords by Nattinger and DeCarrico (1992:39), is a clear example of a variable productive phrase. A rapid trawl through CAE uncovers, among other things, literally speaking, musically speaking, psychologically speaking, properly speaking, relatively speaking, relatiυistically speaking, religiously speaking, roughly speaking, semantically speaking, technically speaking, textually speaking. Lastly, Nattinger and De Carrico seem to base their categorization of lexical phrases on a mixture of pragmatic and lexico-syntactic criteria. Thus, phrasal constraints are defined in terms of their length (‘variable short-to-mediumlength phrases’, with no indication given of what ‘short’ or ‘medium’ denote in this context), whereas sentencebuilders are given a rather vague pragmatic definition (‘items which provide a framework for whole sentences’).

< previous page

page_53

next page >

< previous page

page_54

next page >

Page 54 This leads us to a revision and expansion of Nattinger and DeCarrico’s classification, which, sooner than mix pragmatic and syntactic criteria, takes account of the latter only. Each category is illustrated by a few examples and commented on below. Note that, as I have argued above, there will always be a residue of cases that are not amenable to hard-and-fast categorization. In all three languages under consideration, three major categories of SLDMs can be distinguished: set expressions, sentence fragments and sentence-integrated markers. These in turn comprise a number of subcategories which are somewhat different for each of the languages involved. We shall therefore look at each separately in the remainder of this section. 2.3.1 Syntactic realizations of English SLDMs Let us start with English, where three major categories comprising a number of subcategories can be distinguished: set expressions, sentence fragments and sentence-integrated markers. Table 2.8 provides a broad overview of SLDM types in English. In what follows, some more detailed information will be given on each broad lexico-grammatical category. Let us first take a closer look at set expressions. 2.3.1.1 Set expressions The SLDMs in this category (see Table 2.9) form a fairly small set, most of whose members have been recorded in one or other of the major dictionaries. What is most striking here is the great syntactic diversity: we find prepositional phrases such as in the process or to this end, infinitive phrases such as needless to say or not to mention as well as extragrammatical idioms such as so far so good or be that as it may . As many such expressions are syntactically ill-formed by today’s norms, we may suppose them to be remnants from an earlier period in the history of English. The ill-formedness of such unique items often goes hand in hand with their unanalysability, something that is particularly evident with expressions such as be that as it may . In other cases, such as to this we now turn, we are dealing with frozen syntactic variants of other discourse devices (we now turn to). A wide range of meanings and functions is in evidence, which cannot be discussed in detail here. Perhaps the primary function of these devices is that of establishing anaphoric or cataphoric reference. Many prepositional phrases, for example, contain summative nouns helping to encapsulate a previous or subsequent piece of text, as witness the following: I therefore built the database around those items which CCELD included and identified as ‘phrases’ in the grammatical coding. In the

< previous page

page_54

next page >

< previous page

page_55

next page >

Page 55 Table 2.8 An overview of lexico-grammatical realizations of SLDMs in English Category Examples A Set expressions 1.1Structurally incomplete set expressions so far so good be that as it may with hindsight/with the benefit of hindsight 1.2Structurally complete set expressions to this we now turn this is not the whole story B Sentence fragments 1 anticipatory it+verb/adjective phrase (+complement it will be seen that clause fragment) it seems arguable that it is worth noting that 2 existential clause (+complement clause fragment) there is no denying the fact that there are good reasons for believing that 3 personal pronoun (I/we/one)+ (auxiliary) verb phrase one must acknowledge that (+complement clause fragment) I must point out that we find that 4 noun phrase+[+ (…)]+copular be+that-clause a first point is that a further difficulty (for such an approach) is that my guess is that 5 adverbial clause fragments as has been noted (earlier) 6 participial clauses turning to (…, we find that) 7 with +verbless clause with this in mind 8 infinitive clauses or infinitive clause fragments to return to (NP) to sum up 9 sentence adverbs interestingly (enough) 10 imperatives (and hortatives)+ noun/prepositional phrase let us first look at (fragment) see further in 11 verbless clause fragments One final point on (NP) An example: 12 noun/pronoun+verb phrase+ clause fragment the same goes for mention should be made of (NP) 13 variable prepositional phrases (phrasal constraints) in this case/in the present case in this connection/in that connection 14 phrasal constraints far be it from me to suggest far be it from me to claim 15 here is/are+complement here are a few examples C Sentence-integrated markers 1 noun phrase+V (+…) (active and passive) we have (here) a good example is provided by (NP)↔ (NP) provides a good example 2 sentence-like units such instances could be multiplied

< previous page

page_55

next page >

< previous page

page_56

next page >

Page 56 Table 2.9 Set expressions in English Category 1.1 Structurally incomplete set expressions

Examples so far so good be that as it may with hindsight with the benefit of hindsight in retrospect in the process in the event to this end let alone needless to say not to mention all things considered 1.2 Structurally complete set expressions this is not all this is not the whole story to this we now turn the identity stops there event about 10% of the phrases in CCELD were rejected as not conforming to the types of FEI under consideration… (CAE) This is an instance of conventionalized ‘labelling discourse’ (Francis 1994), one which has not yet found its way into the dictionaries. The content of the first sentence is, as it were, ‘packaged’ into the summative noun eυent, which thus serves as background to the next sentence. 2.3.1.2 Sentence fragments Sentence-fragment SLDM have been grouped into 15 major categories (see Table 2.10), many of which are based on common clause patterns; further subdivisions, as between adjectival and nominal complements for type 1.2, are possible. It is significant that only a limited number of clause patterns seem to lend themselves readily to the formation of SLDMs. Thus, of the SLDMs beginning with anticipatory it and initiating extraposed structures, the pattern it+V+complement+ to-INF is found to occur with high frequency and in varying forms, whereas it is worth +ing and it is worthwhile+ing are the only instances I have noted of the pattern it+V+complement+ing. Let us now look at the various categories one by one. Category 1.1 exemplifies a pattern which is very common in the grammars of academic English and German, but less so in French. In Collins Cobuild Grammar Patterns 1: Verbs (Francis et al. 1996:526ff.), it is described as a productive pattern typically used to express the actions of reporting as well as of thinking and discovering. With regard to SLDMs, this descrip-

< previous page

page_56

next page >

< previous page

Page 57 Table 2.10 English sentence fragments Category 1anticipatory it+υerb/adjective phrase (+complement clause fragment) 1.1 it+be +V-ed+that-clause 1.2

it+V+complement+that-clause/to-inf

1.3

it+V+(to/from n) that

1.4

it+V+complement+ -ing

2existential clause (+ complement clause fragment) 3personal pronoun (I/we/one)+(auxiliary) υerb phrase (+complement clause fragment) 4noun phrase+[+(…)]+copular be+ that-clause

5adυerbial clause fragments 5.1 as+V/ed 5.2

as+participle

5.3

as+subject (we/I/name of author) +V

participial clause 2

7with+υerbless clause 8to-infinitiυe clauses or to-infinitiυe clause fragments

9sentence adυerbs

< previous page

Examples it will be seen that it is conceded that it seems arguable that it is my contention that it is easy to see how it appears that it follows (from this) that it seems (to me) that it is worth noting that it is worthwhile looking at ( also: to look at) there is growing recognition that there is no denying the fact that there are good reasons for believing that one must acknowledge that I must point out that we find that a first point is that a further difficulty (for such an approach) is that my guess is that as has been noted (earlier) as has often been argued as discussed (in section II) as noted (above) as we mentioned earlier as Sinclair notes if I am not mistaken

5.4 simple subordinate clauses 6participial clauses 6.1 participial clause 1 6.2

next page >

page_57

page_57

turning to (…, we find that) summing up (, we can say that) other things (factors) being equal that said simply put narrowly defined with this in mind with this qualification in mind to return to… to illustrate to exemplify… to take a typical case to give just a few examples interestingly (enough) notably strictly (speaking) technically (speaking)

next page >

< previous page

page_58

next page >

Page 58 Category 10imperatives (and hortatiυes)+noun/ prepositional phrase (fragment)

Examples let us first look at see further in compare witness the following 11υerbless clauses and υerbless clause One final point on… so much for fragments A few implications for… An example, therefore—a point discussed separately below 12noun/pronoun+υerb phrase+clause the same goes for similar considerations hold for the same can be said fragment of mention should be made of this brings us to 13υariable prepositional phrases in this case/in the present case in this connection/in that connection 14set expressions+clause fragments of far be it from me to suggest limited υariability far be it from me to claim 15Here is/are+complement here are a few examples tion may be enhanced by two additional observations. First, and most importantly, the verb group often contains a modal auxiliary such as will, must, can or could—an important factor in establishing idiomaticity in academic writing and, more specifically, in marking author stance. Second, many of these constructions have syntactic correlates in parenthetical clauses such as: Thus, it is often belieυed/as has been seen, (S-V-O) (cf. category 5.1 for adverbial clauses beginning with as). The close links between sentence fragments of subcategories 1.1 and 1.2 are obvious and can be accounted for by word formation rules (e.g. it is arguable↔it can be argued ). Equally clear is the kinship with the impersonal ‘one’ constructions of category 3: one might say that ↔it might be said that . Less evident parallels may be detected between verbal sentence fragments such as it is generally accepted and nominal ones like it is a wellknown fact . There are also points of contact between sub-categories 1.1 and 1.2 on the one hand, and category 2 on the other; the connection is via intralingual class shifts: it is increasingly recognized that →there is increasing recognition that . Category 4 comprises nominal constructions built around general abstract nouns such as point, difficulty, complication, criticism or argument and a copular verb.5 A great deal of variation exists among the adverbial clause fragments of

< previous page

page_58

next page >

< previous page

page_59

next page >

Page 59 categories 5.1 to 5.3. These sometimes serve as parenthetical clauses that are neither semantically nor syntactically connected with the relative clause in which they are embedded (see Gallagher 1982:71). By contrast, pushdown clauses without as, as illustrated by which must, I think, be correct, are semantically integrated in the relative clause. It should be noted that the lexicon of these types of clause is quite restricted. The first type occurs mainly with the vocabulary of cross-reference (see Chapter 4); the second is primarily found with υerba dicendi and υerba sentiendi . The participial clauses in category 6.1 illustrate the relative frequency of unattached participles in modern academic prose. Although the usage is still castigated as being unclear in prescriptive grammars, it has been generally acknowledged to be an institutionalized feature of ‘formal scientific writing’, at least since Quirk et al. (1985:1122– 1123). Quirk et al. provide the following example: When treating patients with language retardation and deυiation of language deυelopment, the therapy consists, in part, of discussions of the patient’s problems with parents and teachers, with subsequent language teaching carried out by them. (Quirk et al. 1985:1123) The attachment rule is also relaxed in the case of some participial clauses in category 6.2. Examples are adverbial clauses such as simply put or put another way. Other items in this category constitute grammatically independent clauses (that said). Participial SLDMs are notable as spanning a broad range of syntactic flexibility. There is a gradual shading-off from relatively free expressions such as supposing or disregarding, which retain many of the characteristics of verbs, through less flexible items such as considering or ( weather/resources etc.) permitting down to the conjunctional proυided or the prepositional regarding . Since the two latter groups regularly occur as unattached participles even outside academic writing, it is reasonable to argue that they cannot be regarded as verbs in participle clauses (see Quirk et al. 1985:1003). Category 7 comprises verbless clauses introduced by the preposition with. Because it introduces a subclause with should here be interpreted as a conjunction or subordinator rather than as a preposition (see Quirk et al. 1985:705). Oddly enough, the clauses in this category appear to be unrelated to participial clauses introduced by with, as the insertion of the participle being into examples such as with this in mind does not yield acceptable wordings. One of the peculiarities of this construction is the semantic versatility of the subordinator with . It can have causal, conditional, temporal, concessive and modal meaning (see Königs 1998). Category 8 groups together infinitive clauses and infinitive clause fragments. These tend to occur as free adjuncts attached to a complex

< previous page

page_59

next page >

< previous page

page_60

next page >

Page 60 sentence, but can also stand on their own (To turn now to the history of the institution.). In comparison to participle clauses, infinitive clauses are syntactically less fixed, although clauses such as to illustrate or to continue may be left unexpanded by an object and in this form may be considered to constitute non-compositional units: One reason that harvests were large despite the droughts is people’s increased capacity to overcome adverse natural conditions. To illustrate, one of the most publicized droughts was in southern California. (CAE) As a result, the notion that it is somehow ‘wrong’ to end a sentence with a preposition is nowadays widely held. In addition, Lowth insisted on the pronoun I in phrases such as wiser than I, condemning lines of Swift such as ‘she suffers hourly more than me’, quite oblivious of the fact that many languages, English included, prefer a different form of the pronoun when it is detached from its verb: compare the French plus sage que moi ‘wiser than me’, not *plus sage que je . In consequence, many people nowadays believe that a phrase such as wiser than I is ‘better’ than wiser than me. To continue, Lowth may have been the first to argue that a double negative is wrong, on the grounds that one cancels the other out. (CAE) There are some correspondences between participial and infinitive clauses, as in the following example, where an infinitive may be substituted for the participle continuing: Continuing this theme, let us now consider each of the patterns that occur with the verb take to indicate duration. (CAE) The sentence adverbs in category 9 are a productive pattern, with a large range of adjectives capable of becoming a member of this category: obυious →obυiously, clear→clearly, plain→plainly, manifest→manifestly, eυident →eυidently, presumable →presumably, superficial →superficially, nominal →nominally, hypothetical→hypothetically, interesting →interestingly, odd →oddly, and so on. Many of these occur with the adverb enough: oddly enough, interestingly enough. Also of interest is the way in which sentence adverbs cluster at the beginning of sentences. Most commonly this happens with combinations of the type first(ly)+most/less/(just) as/equally important(ly), but there are also other cases: Firstly, and perhaps most contentiously, we might sometimes consider brevity at the expense of attempting to cover all necessary conditions. (CAE)

< previous page

page_60

next page >

< previous page

page_61

next page >

Page 61 There is also a ‘trade-off’ between category 1.2 and a subcategory of sentence adverbs, as exemplified by the following transformation: it is significant that ↔significantly . Other adjectives conforming to this pattern include clear, plain, manifest, interesting and odd . It is worth noting that all the adjectives capable of being used in this way accept modification by enough when transformed into sentence adverbs. Category 10 comprises imperatives and hortatives. The number of verbs entering this pattern is comparatively limited; among the most frequent we find see, look (at), consider and note . The illocutionary force of such imperatives in academic writing is, of course, that of an invitation rather than an injunction or command. Categories 11 and 12 are very similar. The former contains verbless clauses and verbless clause fragments, while the latter consists of a simple S-V-clause plus a clause fragment. There are clear correspondences between the two categories. For instance, a verbless clause such as a few implications for +NP can be readily expanded into an S-Vclause of category 12: a few implications should be mentioned for +NP. Most of the prepositional phrases in category 13 are lexicalized items that have been registered in the major dictionaries. Their variability is so restricted that they may, with almost equal justification, be assigned to the category of set expressions. In this connection, for example, only admits of one variant, namely in that connection. Category 14 is a special case in that it contains clause-fragment SLDMs based on syntactically deviant set expressions such as far be it from me, and its erroneous variant far be it for me. The latter may be followed by a small range of verbs, most commonly suggest. Equally limited in variability are the items in category 15 based on the place adverb here plus copular be. This structure commonly initiates patterns such as here is another example . 2.3.1.3 Sentence-integrated markers I have deliberately stretched Nattinger and DeCarrico’s categories to cover sentence-integrated markers. To my knowledge, the term ‘integrated marker’ was first used, but not defined, in Quirk et al. (1972:671ff.). Sentenceintegrated markers may be regarded as restricted collocations of type 3 discussed above; they are usually centred around a two-element association realizing a succession of two or more clause constituents (thus, subject+verb [we get, a moment’s thought suggests], verb+prepositional object [by NP is meant], subject+verb+prepositional object [a good example is proυided by NP, by NP we mean], etc.). As a simple calculation readily attests, they are typically more variable than sentence fragments. Comparing infinitive phrases of the type to take an example with integrated markers of the type an example is proυided by…, we find that the first type of construction only permits five verbs ( take, giυe, cite, pick and use ) to fill

< previous page

page_61

next page >

< previous page Page 62 Table 2.11 Sentence-integrated markers Category 1noun phrase+verb phrase (+passive variant)

page_62

next page >

in English Examples a good example is provided by (NP)↔ (NP) provides a good example I will now briefly describe (NP)↔(NP) will be briefly described I will define (NP) as follows↔(NP) will be defined as follows the next section develops this point↔this point will be developed in the next section we use the term to refer to… we get we have (here) this gives us finally, we return to (NP) (having discussed…,) we are now ready to consideration/analysis/investigation/ scrutiny…suggests/shows a moment’s thought/reflection suggests/ allows us to see/… by…we mean

2(noun phrase+) verb phrase+ prepositional phrase (+passive variant) 3sentence-like units such instances could be multiplied the infinitive slot, whereas the second admits of at least ten different verbs. This means that, other things being equal, sentence-integrated markers are much more productive, especially since they allow both active and passive constructions. The productivity of sentence fragments is much lower, not least owing to apparent restrictions on the choice of adjectives within the infinitive phrase. Some examples can be found in Table 2.12. Still, as was shown in Section 2.2, collocational variability is contained within relatively clear limits even for sentence-integrated markers. 2.3.2 Syntactic realizations of French SLDMs Let us now direct our attention to French, where a similar picture emerges. Table 2.13 presents an overview of syntactic realizations of French SLDMs. A cursory glance at this table suggests that there is a large degree of categorial overlap between English and French. English constructions controlled by anticipatory it may be likened to French constructions initiated by il or ce/cela; English existential clauses initiated by there+ copular be may be compared to French clauses controlled by il y a; similar remarks could be made for most other categories, with the excep-

< previous page

page_62

next page >

< previous page

page_63

next page >

Page 63 Table 2.12 Comparison of sentence fragments and sentence-integrated markers (citations from CAE and EB) Sentence fragments Sentence-integrated markers to (INFINITIVE)…a/the (ADJ) example VERB+ADJECTIVE+a/the example the example of NP might make this clearer to take but one example A pertinent example is afforded by NP to take an extended example A good example is proυided by NP to take two random examples Another such example is afforded by NP to give an example At this point, perhaps, an example of NP should be giυen. to giυe a few examples to giυe two examples …, as we see from such examples as NP to cite another example A simple example of NP is seen in the case of NP to pick just one example …is a frequent example of NP to use the example aboυe A brief example of NP will serυe to illustrate this. tion perhaps of category 15. One important difference is that some French SLDMs also have an inverted form (croyons-nous, a-t-on dit). Let us now consider each category in greater detail. 2 .3.2.1 Set expressions As in English, invariant SLDMs are a fairly unremarkable set containing a limited number of items, many of which are syntactically ill-formed and unanalysable (see Table 2.14). Most of them have been recorded in the standard reference works, but their lexicographic treatment has been severely lacking in depth (cf. Jespersen 1993). In particular, the dictionaries are silent on the pragmatic value of these markers. It is interesting to note that structurally incomplete set expressions of the prepositional phrase type, such as en ce sens and sur ces entrefaites, appear to have passed into general use only recently. In earlier writings we find a partiality for pronominal substitution of the following type: C’est alors que nous pourrions parler de conditions proprement instantanées. Ces conditions sont rigoureusement préliminaires, mieux pré-initiales puisqu’elles sont antécédentes à ce que les géomètres appellent les conditions initiales du mouvement. C’est en cela qu’elles sont métaphysiques et non pas abstraitement instantanées. (Bachelard, Intuition de l’Instant, 1932, cited after Jespersen 1993:32; emphasis hers) However, Jespersen’s (1993:32) claim that such wordings have all but disappeared from contemporary written French is not supported by the evidence. To take but one example, in CAF there are 28 occurrences of c’est en

< previous page

page_63

next page >

< previous page Page 64 Table 2.13 Syntactic realizations of French SLDMs Category Set expressions 1.1Structurally incomplete set expressions

Examples

1.2Structurally complete set expressions Sentence fragments 1 anticipatory il/ce/cela +verb phrase+ adjective/noun phrase (+complement clause fragment) 2 personal pronoun (je/on/nous) + verb phrase (+inf. +)+que (or inυerted υariant)/+(à/de) NP

3 first-person-plural imperative (hortative)+complement 4 adverbial clause (fragment) 5 infinitive clauses introduced by pour or sans 6 sentence adverbs 7 noun phrase+copular be+que-clause/ noun phrase+ c’est que 8 verbless clause 9 participial clause 10 noun/pronoun+verb phrase+ clause fragment 11 set expressions+clause fragments of limited variability 12 noun phrase+verb phrase+ complement-clause fragment 13 il y a+complement 14 ce qui+verb phrase+complement clause 15 υoici +complement 16 variable prepositional phrases

Sentence-integrated markers 1 noun phrase+verb phrase 2 sentence-like units

< previous page

next page >

page_64

soit dit en passant quoi qu’il en soit et j’ en passe il est admis que c’est un fait avéré que il est intéressant de noter à cet égard que on sait que objectera-t-on croyons-nous je me bornerai à nous le verrons revenons à NP disons donc, avec Guillaume, que voyons la chose de près comme nous le verrons plus loin ainsi qu’il a été dit plus haut (ajoutons,) pour être complet (on peut dire) sans trop exagérer mieux encore plus largement encore le problème est que le problème, c’est que autre remarque: fait plus grave: cela dit/ceci dit le tout est de savoir si il en va de même pour reste à savoir (à quel moment) l’expérience prouve que chacun sait que il y a plus (grave) il y a tout lieu de se demander pourquoi ce qui prouve que ce qui semble montrer que voici deux autres exemples dans ce cas/dans le cas présent/dans le cas qui nous occupe …nous fournit un bon exemple là s’arrête le parallèle on pourrait multiplier les exemples

page_64

next page >

< previous page

page_65

next page >

Page 65 Table 2.14 Set expressions in French Category 1.1 Structurally incomplete set expressions

Examples soit dit en passant quoi qu’il en soit de ce fait pour ce faire autant dire que c’est-à-dire c’est dire par là qu’il suffise de citer sur ces entrefaites dans cette alternative à ce sujet seulement voilà en cela ce faisant chemin faisant (et) pour cause le tout est de vienne (+NP) (obsolescent) n’était 1.2 Structurally complete set expressions et j’en passe le parallèle s’arrête là cela que, as against 70 for c’est en ce sens que, showing that c’est en cela que is not yet on the way out. 2.3.2.2 Sentence fragments As the above examples show, French has a great variety of sentence fragments to offer, of which two stand out due to structural peculiarities not found in English or German: first, parenthetical clauses (categories 2 and 4) and, second, the ce qui sentence fragment (category 14). As for parenthetical clauses, two different types may be distinguished. One is introduced by the conjunctions comme or ainsi que, and has therefore been grouped with adverbial-clause fragments (category 4). The other (category 2) is not formally marked by conjunctions or other lexico-grammatical means, except that it may entail inversion (a-t-on dit). The ce qui sentence fragments in category 14 occur mainly with verbs like montrer or prouυer, but also go to make up other relatively fixed expressions such as ce qui complique les choses. Let us now deal with each category in turn. Category 1 comprises impersonal expressions introduced by il, ce or cela . Most of its subcategories are highly productive, so much so that some of its members may not be entirely in keeping with our definition of SLDMs as restricted collocations (e.g. il serait téméraire de croire que ). By way

< previous page

page_65

next page >

< previous page

Page 66 Table 2.15 French sentence fragments Category 1anticipatory il/ce/cela+υerb/ adjective phrase (+complement clause fragment) 1.1il+être/sembler (etc.) +adjective+ que -clause fragment 1.2il+être (etc.) +past participle+ que -clause fragment 1.3il est/c’est+noun phrase+que-clause fragment 1.4il+être (etc.) +adjective+de-inf./ noun+que-clause/whclause fragment

1.5il+être (etc.) +past participle+ de-inf. +que -clause 1.6il+être (etc.) +past participle+ que -clause 1.7il+reflexive verb phrase+ que 1.8impersonal verb+que -clause/+NP

2je/on/nous+υerb phrase (+inf. +)+ que (or inυerted υariant)/+(à/de) NP

3first-person-plural imperatiυe (hortative)+complement

4adυerbial clause (fragment) 5infinitiυe clauses introduced by pour or sans

6sentence adυerbs

< previous page

next page >

page_66

page_66

Examples il est exact que il est clair que il est indéniable que il est généralement reconnu que il est admis que il est un fait connu que c’est un fait avéré que il est aisé d’imaginer que il est intéressant de noter à cet égard que il serait téméraire de croire que il est digne de remarque que il est commode de distinguer il est permis de penser que il a été amplement démontré que il y a déjà été fait allusion il s’avère que il découle de ces constatations que il ressort de ce qui précède que il va de soi que il faut reconnaître que il convient d’ajouter que il semble que on sait que on a très longtemps cru que on conçoit mal (e.g. une chanson sans clip) objectera-t-on a-t-on dit croyons-nous je me bornerai à nous le verrons revenons à NP disons donc, avec Guillaume, que voyons la chose de près prenons comme illustration NP comme nous le verrons plus loin ainsi qu’il a été dit plus haut (ajoutons,) pour être complet pour terminer pour parler clair pour ne prendre qu’un exemple pour reprendre la formule de (on peut dire) sans trop exagérer mieux encore plus largement encore

next page >

< previous page

page_67

Page 67 Category 7 noun phrase+copular be+que-clause/noun phrase+c’est que 8 υerbless clause

9 participial or gerund clause (fragment) 9.1 participial or gerund clause 1 9.2 participial or gerund clause 2

next page >

Examples le problème est que le problème, c’est que autre remarque: fait plus grave: deuxième exemple: première question à se poser: un mot sur… une supposition:

en admettant que/en admettant (NP) considérant que cela dit/ceci dit/cela étant dit ce point acquis 10noun phrase+υerb phrase+ clause fragment le tout est de savoir (si/comment) il en va de même (pour) il en va ainsi (de) 11set expressions with a limited number of preferred reste à (savoir) complements force est de (constater) 12noun phrase+υerb phrase+ complement-clause fragment l’expérience prouve que chacun sait que …, l’exemple de NP le montre bien,… 13il y a/il est (existential clause)+ complement-clause il y a plus (grave) fragment il y a tout lieu de se demander pourquoi il est des cas où 14ce qui+verb phrase+complement-clause fragment ce qui prouve que ce qui semble montrer que ce qui complique les choses 15υoici+complement voici deux autres exemples 16υariable prepositional phrases dans ce cas/dans le cas présent/dans le cas qui nous occupe of contrast, subcategories 1.3 and 1.7 are only a limited source of French SLDMs. Thus, the reflexive construction il s’aυère que is unchangeable, except with regard to tense, and it is impossible for the noun slot in il est/c’est un+NP+que to be filled by any other noun than fait when this structure serves to form an SLDM. Category 2 covers items built around a personal pronoun and a verb phrase. Many of these items are remarkable as taking both clausal and nominal complementation, with the nominal variant being less frequent but stylistically superior. Compare: On sait que les grands ensembles sont caractérisés par leur hétérogénéité sociale et culturelle. (CAF)

< previous page

page_67

next page >

< previous page

page_68

next page >

Page 68 On sait le prix que l’on attache outre-Atlantique au potentiel d’inno vation des jeunes, voire même de très jeunes, en matière d’applications informatiques. (CAF) Here the second sentence may be rephrased using a verbal construction: on sait qu’outre-Atlantique on attache une grande importance au potentiel d’innovation des jeunes… The nominal variant is particularly common with nouns indicating importance or value, such as importance, intérêt, parti (à tirer), prix, rôle or centralité. It is usually found in cases where these take just one complement. However, a writer wishing to use the nominal construction with a noun taking two complements (e.g. la tentation de qqn de faire qqc) can resort to the simple syntactic trick of inserting a relative clause behind the noun, a procedure known as ‘étoffement’, or augmentation, in comparative stylistics and commonly used in English-French and German-French translation: On sait la tentation qui est celle de l’analyste de penser en termes d’identification projective. (CAF) Owing to the valency of such French verbs as saυoir and croire, the SLDMs based on them can enter another complementation pattern, namely S+V+O+ADJ, exemplified by the following sentence, where the adjective fréquent(e) functions as an object complement to the noun phrase la maladie: On sait la maladie fréquente, surtout en Sibérie. (CAF) Again we are dealing with an elegant variant of the verbal pattern: the above example sentence may be recast as on sait que la maladie est fréquente, surtout en Sibérie. Category 3 is made up of first-person-plural imperatives or, to use the classical term, ‘hortatives’. As in English, there is only a small range of verbs entering this SLDM; typical examples are prendre, υoir and remarquer. The illocutionary force of the hortative is somewhat weaker than that of an imperative, allowing the author to engage in a dialogue with her readers rather than enjoining them to perform some action. As already mentioned, the adverbial clauses of category 4 often occur as parenthetical clauses. Unlike English adverbial clauses initiated by as, they can be followed only by a clause, not by a participle on its own. The lexicon of these clauses is comparatively restricted; there is usually a verb of perception, reporting or saying, often combined with an adverbial of place or time such as plus haut, plus loin or précédemment. It has already

< previous page

page_68

next page >

< previous page

page_69

next page >

Page 69 been noted that we find parenthetical clauses which are not introduced by a conjunction, but are otherwise equivalent to the ones under discussion. These brief interpolated clauses are referred to as incises in French grammar; their position in the sentence is quite variable (see also Chapter 4): Pour eux, nous l’avons vu, la loi était la raison humaine manifestée par la volonté générale en qui elle s’incarne. (CAF) Category 5, comprising infinitive clauses introduced by pour or sans, is a rich source of French SLDMs. Unlike English infinitive clauses, they must be attached to a main clause—if sometimes only by a colon—although most of them, such as pour reprendre les termes de+NP, do not require subject identification, as witness the following example: C’est une institution, c’est-à-dire, pour reprendre les termes d’Hauriou, une idée œuvre qui devient porteuse d’une norme sociale. (CAF) The sentence adverbs in category 6 are also a highly productive group (cf. for example curieusement, apparemment, de toute éυidence, historiquement, ironiquement, paradoxalement). They often occur in the comparative, as amply demonstrated by such occurrences as plus étémentairement, plus abstraitement, plus brutalement, plus banalement, plus concrètement, plus fondamentalement, plus globalement, plus généralement, plus profondément, plus prosaïquement, etc. They may also be further pre-modified (cf. et puis tout aussi radicalement). The nominal constructions in category 7 centre around general abstract nouns such as problème or difficulté and a copular verb. The range of nouns capable of displaying this pattern is, however, more restricted than in English. Category 8, containing verbless clauses of various types, is notably common in French prose. Three main types may be distinguished: (a) clauses consisting of an unmodified noun (témoin:), (b) clauses consisting of a modified noun phrase (autre remarque, fait plus graυe) , (c) clauses consisting of a noun phrase followed by a prepositional phrase. Verbless constructions such as these are stylistically useful in that they make for clarity and concision. The participial and gerund clauses in category 9 are just as intriguing as their English counterparts. First, just as in English, participial SLDMs of category 9.2, such as ceci dit, constitute grammatically independent clauses not requiring subject identification. Second, the lexemes initiating participle or gerund clauses vary in their syntactic flexibility. Some, such as admettant, can be followed by either a nominal or a clausal complement, thus retaining some verbal features. An example:

< previous page

page_69

next page >

< previous page

page_70

next page >

Page 70 R.-L.Wagner (1968), qui note que le «terme de “mot” en est venu assez tard en français à traduire la notion d’une unité lexicale autonome», tout en admettant le bien-fondé de l’analyse qu’A. Martinet fait de la notion de «mot», refuse pourtant d’abandonner ce terme parce que la lexicologie porte sur l’étude des signes en situation. (CAF) Category 10 comprises items that may almost equally well be grouped under set expressions, for their variability is extremely restricted. Consider, for example, the SLDM le tout est de saυoir: The only variation possible here is by putting the verb in another tense. Of course, other verbs may also complement the sequence le tout est de, but none of these are so frequent that we would be justified in talking of an SLDM. Rather, we may view le tout est de as an SLDM in its own right, roughly equivalent to il suffit de, and classify it under the heading of set expressions. Another example is il en υa de même (pour/de/dans/à) , whose only variants—disregarding for the moment the possibility of negation—are il en est de même, il en υa pareillement and il en υa également (the latter two being extremely rare). The SLDMs in category 11 are similar to set expressions of the type le tout est de, with the one difference that they enjoy less freedom of complementation. Thus, only a limited number of verbs follow the sequence force est de with any regularity: constater, reconnaître, remarquer, souligner, ajouter . Category 12 comprises restricted noun-verb collocations of the type l’expérience prouυe que or chacun sait que, including parenthetical clauses of the type l’exemple ci-dessus le montre bien . The category admits a large range of superficially different items such as chacun conυiendra que, l’expérience montre que, rien ne prouυe que, etc. Interestingly, however, most such items operate as suggestors of one sort or another (see Chapter 3). Existential constructions initiated by presentative il y a, here subsumed under category 13, have given rise to a large number of SLDMs. They may be divided into two groups, according to whether the clause is or is not self-contained. Among the most prominent exponents of self-contained clauses we find il y a plus, il y a plus graυe, il y a pire, il y a mieux. The commonest items in the other subset are il y a (tout) lieu de (se demander), il y a (grand) intérêt à, il y a aυantage à, il y a à cela deux raisons, il y a de fortes/grandes chances pour que, il y a fort à craindre/parier que, il y a gros à parier que, il y a grand besoin de and il y a place pour . To these we might add such constructions as si/puisque/car (etc.) +NP+il y a, where the noun precedes the presentative form, and il n’y a pas jusqu’à+ NP+qui/où+ne+VP (etc.). According to Godin (1948:116–117), the former construction is an interpolated conditional or causal clause casting doubt on the preceding assertion or laying emphasis on it, as the case may be; the latter employs the double negative for stylistic effect. Godin’s description of the former can be enhanced by two observations. First, it is not the content of the entire preceding sentence that is called into ques-

< previous page

page_70

next page >

< previous page

page_71

next page >

Page 71 tion or emphasized by such constructions, but rather a particular state of affairs expressed by means of a noun phrase, as conveniently illustrated by the following examples: Le droit communautaire prend ici une place supérieure par rapport au régime de protection nationale, mais cet inconvénient—si inconvénient il y a—est compensé par le fait que les signes nationaux sont de facto vus reconnaître une protection au niveau communautaire. (CAF) Sans parler de la destruction de milliers d’hectares cultivés et de l’impact sur l’environnement. Car impact il y a: aucun des insecticides utilisés (la Deltaméthrine, une pyréthrénoïde commercialisée par AgrEvo, et le Fipronil, une molécule de la famille des phényl-pirazoles mise au point par Rhône-Poulenc) n’est spécifique des acridiens. (CAF) Second, Godin overlooks the fact that constructions of the type si+NP+il y a can also serve as ordinary conditional or concessive clauses. In other words, we are dealing with a case of inverted word order; in the following example we might equally well have s’il y a polémique instead of si polémique il y a: Cela n’ira pas sans mal car si polémique il y a (et il y aura), c’est parce que le véritable enjeu du débat reste l’enfant. (CAF) Category 14 comprises sentential relative clauses, their relative abundance in French making it necessary to accord them category status. Whereas in English such structures are common only with verbs such as mean, there is a much greater. variety to be encountered in French. Examples are ce qui complique les choses, ce qui υeut dire que or ce qui prouυe que . Category 15 bears a certain resemblance to category 13 in that both υoici and il y a are presentative forms serving to introduce the notional subject and hence to rhematize important content. They are thus used to draw the reader’s attention to an entire proposition, often introducing examples or enumerations (Il y a à cela plusieurs raisons. En υoici les principales). Category 16 is made up of variable prepositional phrases such as dans ce cas/dans le cas présent/dans le cas qui nous occupe. English items of this nature, it will be recalled, are clearly lexicalized expressions whose variability is so restricted that they may just as well be subsumed under set expressions. As in English, there are various points of contact between categories. However, these are often so obvious as not to warrant discussion (e.g. il est

< previous page

page_71

next page >

< previous page

page_72

next page >

Page 72 un fait remarquable que [category 1.3]↔il est digne de remarque que [category 1.4], etc.). 2.3.2.3 Sentence-integrated markers As in English, there is an abundance of sentence-integrated markers to be found, and we can use the same categories to divide them up (see Table 2.16). It is noteworthy that many of the items in category 1 are built around the verb permettre or similar verbs ( obliger, forcer, etc.) and that the items in category 2 often serve definitional functions. Equally remarkable is the wide array of sentence-like units subject only to slight variations. Compare: Mais là s’arrête la similitude. Le parallèle s’arrête là. Là s’arrête le parallèle. Mais la similitude des situations s’arrête là. (NF) Deux explications doivent à ce propos être avancées. Deux explications sont généralement avancées. Différentes explications peuvent en être données. Plusieurs explications peuvent être proposées. Plusieurs explications furent données. Trois explications rivales sont possibles. Deux types d’explications peuvent être avancées a ce phénoméne. (CAF) Table 2.16 Sentence-integrated markers in French Category Examples 1noun phrase+verb phrase (NP) nous fournit un bon exemple↔un bon exemple nous est fourni par (NP) (NP) offre quelque parenté avec (NP) un examen rapide permet de distinguer (NP) cette brève analyse permet de comprendre (NP/clause) une vue objective des choses oblige a constater que (NP) appelle quelques remarques 2noun phrase+verb phrase+ prepositional par…, on entend phrase on parle de…lorsque on perçoit avec (sur) ces exemples on peut dire avec X que 3sentence-like units là s’arrête le parallèle on pourrait multiplier les exemples les exemples abondent deux raisons l’expliquent trois explications sont généralement avancées

< previous page

page_72

next page >

< previous page

page_73

next page >

Page 73 From these examples it is obvious that the boundaries between category 1 and category 3 are not entirely clear-cut. 2.3.3 Syntactic realizations of German SLDMs We now turn to the syntactic realizations of German SLDMs. Again, we find the same tripartite division into set expressions, sentence fragments and sentence-integrated markers, as the overview in Table 2.17 shows. The table illustrates the remarkable structural diversity of German SLDMs, especially with regard to the category of sentenceintegrated markers. We may surmise that, since German is a free-word-order language, discourse markers use in this language may be subject to more ad hoc change (see House 1997 [79ff.] on the general tendency of German to ad hoc formulation). Let us now proceed to look at each category in greater detail. 2.3.3.1 Set expressions As in English and French, this group is relatively small, and its members differ in their syntactic make-up (see Table 2.18). 2.3.3.2 Sentence fragments The reader accustomed to German academic texts will not fail to notice that the sentence fragment SLDMs presented in Table 2.19 have been pared down to their essentials by omitting structurally irrelevant anaphoric or cataphoric elements such as pronominal adverbs ( hierbei, damit, etc.) or one-word discourse markers (e.g. also or wohl )—‘structurally’ being the operative word, for there is a higher mutual expectancy between such particles and second-level markers in German than in either English or French. Note that, given the relative flexibility of word order and theme-rheme arrangement in German, the syntactic realizations of these markers in actual text may not always correspond to the citation forms shown here. Thus, the citation form es ist bemerkenswert, dass, at three occurrences, occurs much less frequently in CAG than its syntactic variant bemerkenswert ist, dass at 14 occurrences. Table 2.20 shows the full range of syntactic variation for the citation form es ist anzumerken, dass. It turns out that there are five major syntactic patterns. Each of these patterns can be thought of as a frame offering three different types of slot; in the third pattern, for example, the first slot is filled by a qualifying adverb (e.g. kritisch ), while the second and third slots may be filled, respectively, by the theme under discussion and a conjunct (e.g. jedoch or ferner ). A further complication affecting German SLDMs is that some possible citation forms are totally absent from actual text. An example is es bleibt

< previous page

page_73

next page >

< previous page Page 74 Table 2.17 Syntactic realizations of German SLDMs Category Set expressions 1.1Structurally incomplete set expressions

Examples

1.2Structurally complete set expressions Sentence fragments 1 anticipatory es+verb phrase (+complement clause fragment)

2 ich/wir/man +verb phrase+ complement clause fragment

3 first-person-plural imperative (hortative) (+complement fragment)

4 adverbial clause (fragment)

5 infinitive clauses

6 sentence adverbs

7 noun phrase+copular sein+dass-clause

< previous page

next page >

page_74

page_74

geschweige denn wie dem auch sei zu diesem Zweck us diesem Grund in dieser Hinsicht Das ist noch nicht alles es steht fest, dass es geht darum, dass es liegt nahe, dass es fragt sich, ob es sei bemerkt, dass es sei darauf hingewiesen, dass es darf davon ausgegangen werden, dass so ist (es) zu erklären, dass wir werden sehen, wie wir bemerken, dass wir entnehmen daraus, dass wir müssen uns vor Augen führen man beachte, dass man wird sich fragen man muß dem entgegenhalten, dass vielleicht sollte man sich einmal fragen man sollte nicht vergessen, dass betrachten wir vergegenwärtigen wir uns dies an… fassen wir zusammen stellen wir zunächst fest,… nehmen wir einmal an wie ich bereits gezeigt habe wie bereits gesagt wenn ich richtig sehe womit wir bei…wären um es auf den Punkt zu bringen um es gleich zu sagen um dies einmal zu veranschaulichen um Mißverständnissen vorzubeugen um aber wieder auf unser Hauptthema zurückzukommen um ein Beispiel zu nennen strenggenommen merkwürdigerweise genauer bekanntlich eine weitere Schwierigkeit ist, dass ein Grund ist, dass

next page >

< previous page Page 75 Category 8 verbless clause

9 participial clause

10set expressions with a limited number of variable complements 11variable prepositional phrases 12noun phrase+verb phrase+clause fragment

Sentence-integrated markers 1 noun phrase+verb phrase

Examples geschweige denn wie dem auch sei zu diesem Zweck in dieser Hinsicht Das ist noch nicht alles.

Structurally complete set expressions

< previous page

Examples (Zum Schluß) noch eine Bemerkung zu… Dazu das folgende Zitat: Nun zu… Zur Erinnerung: zusammenfassend (läßt sich sagen, dass) resümierend anders ausgedrückt pointiert formuliert vergröbernd gesprochen insgesamt gesehen zusammengefaßt: man kann nicht umhin in dieser/jener Hinsicht in diesem/jenem Zusammenhang analoges gilt für anders verhält es sich mit Wen darf es Wunder nehmen, dass wie kommt es aber, dass…? so kommt es, dass hier schließt sich der Kreis (zu dem, was…) ein flüchtiger Blick auf…zeigt ein Einwand könnte lauten, dass bleibt letztens noch… relatives Einverständnis besteht darüber, dass die Vermutung liegt nahe, dass das Gesagte bedeutet, dass Beweis dafür ist angefangen von…über…bis hin zu…spannt sich der Bogen solche Beispiele ließen sich beliebig vermehren

2 sentence-like units Table 2.18 Set expressions in German Category 1.1 Structurally incomplete set expressions

1.2

next page >

page_75

page_75

next page >

< previous page

page_76

next page >

Page 76 Table 2.19 German sentence fragments Category Examples 1anticipatory es+verb phrase (+complement clause fragment) es steht fest, dass es sei bemerkt, dass es sei darauf hingewiesen, dass es darf davon ausgegangen werden, dass es ist anzumerken, dass es ist festzustellen, dass es bleibt festzuhalten, dass es ist/steht zu vermuten, dass es verdient betont zu werden, dass ohne Übertreibung läßt sich behaupten, dass 2 ich/wir/man +verb phrase+complement clause fragment wir werden sehen, wie complement clause fragment wir bemerken, dass wir entnehmen daraus, dass wir müssen uns vor Augen führen, dass man beachte, dass man wird sich fragen man muß dem entgegenhalten, dass vielleicht sollte man sich einmal fragen man sollte nicht vergessen, dass 3first-person-plural imperative (hortative) (+complement betrachten wir fragment) vergegenwärtigen wir uns dies an… fassen wir zusammen stellen wir zunächst fest,… nehmen wir einmal an 4adverbial clause (fragment) wie ich bereits gezeigt habe wie bereits gesagt wie bereits oben nachgewiesen worden ist so darf angenommen werden 5infinitive clauses um es auf den Punkt zu bringen um es gleich zu sagen um dies einmal zu veranschaulichen um Mißverständnissen vorzubeugen um aber wieder auf unser Hauptthema zurückzukommen um ein Beispiel zu nennen 6sentence adverbs strenggenommen merkwürdigerweise genauer bekanntlich 7noun phrase+copular be+ dass -clause/wh-clause eine weitere Schwierigkeit ist, dass ein Grund ist, dass die Folge davon ist, dass 8verbless clause (Zum Schluß) noch eine Bemerkung zu… Dazu das folgende Zitat: Nun zu… Zur Erinnerung:

< previous page

page_76

next page >

< previous page Page 77 Category 9 participial clause

10set expressions with a limited number of variable complements 11variable prepositional phrases

page_77

next page >

Examples zusammenfassend (läßt sich sagen, dass) resümierend anders ausgedrückt pointiert formuliert vergröbernd gesprochen insgesamt gesehen zusammengefaßt: man kann nicht umhin

aus diesem Grund zu diesem Zweck 12noun phrase+verb phrase+ clause fragment analoges gilt für anders verhält es sich mit Wen darf es Wunder nehmen, dass wie kommt es aber, dass…? so kommt es, dass hier schließt sich der Kreis (zu dem, was…) noch, which only occurs in CAG in the inverted form bleibt (letztens) noch+NP . As in English and French, the number of patterns formed by German SLDMs is limited; they may be arranged in 12 major categories. Within individual categories the productivity of patterns varies. We will now proceed to look at each category one by one. Category 1 may be further subdivided along the lines shown in Table 2.21. Category 1.1 comprises a closed, and therefore unproductive, set of highly frequent SLDMs, of which Table 2.21 shows the most common. Several of the verbs in this category are used in a reflexive ‘middle voice’ construction, as with es stellt sich heraus, dass or es fragt sich, ob. Category 1.2 is based around υerba dicendi such as sagen, feststellen, anmerken or betonen . In category 1.3 similar verbs are used with the present subjunctive of sein . Category 1.4 comprises structures using auxiliary verbs such as dürfen and müssen with the past participle. These structures are generally equivalent to ones in which the reflexive verb sich lassen is used with the infinitive, as shown in category 1.5. Category 1.6 is composed of constructions containing a copular verb followed by either an adjective or an adjectival past participle. Category 1.7 is centred around common noun-verb collocations which here occur in impersonal form. There are close links between the impersonal constructions of category 1 and those of category 2. A certain number of correspondences can be established by means of simple syntactic transformations. Note, however, that preferred ways of putting things place constraints on such correspondences—more so in German than in either of the other languages under

< previous page

page_77

next page >

< previous page

page_78

next page >

Page 78 Table 2.20 Syntactic realizations of es ist anzumerken, dass Es ist anzumerken, dass Structureszu etw./bei etw.//hierzu/dazu/hierbei ist (kritisch/negativ// positiv//generell/überhaupt… och/ferner/außerdem) anzumerken, daß… Es ist (kritisch/noch/ferner/negativ…) (zu etw.) anzumerken, daß… (Kritisch/Negativ//Positiv//Generell/Überhaupt…) ist (zu etw.) (jedoch/indes//noch/ferner/außerdem/…) anzumerken, daß… (kritisch/negativ//positiv…) anzumerken ist (jedoch/indes// ferner/außerdem/…), daß... (hier[zu]/dazu/an dieser Stelle…) ist/wäre (einiges/ folgendes/etliches…) anzumerken Examples Grundsätzlich ist zu den “Umstmkturierungsprozessen” anzumerken. daß Sanierungs- und Neuaufbaukonzepte—auch unter dem Eindruck des vorhandenen und immer noch steigenden Überangebots von Arbeitskräften—niger in Abhängigkeit von den jeweiligen Potentialen gesehen werden, als beinahe ausschließlich im Kontext von Absatzerwartungen, Investitionsrenditen und Finanzierungshilfen. Dabei ist zunächst anzumerken. dass ich mich im Rahmen der Arbeit der Jahrgangsstufe 11 zwar für eine integrale Präsentation der BD entschied, den Schülern aber immer nur sukzessiv Teile des Werkes in Kopien vorgelegt wurden. Kritisch anzumerken ist hierbei. dass sie ihre eigenen Standpunkte zwar in den Diskussionen einbringen konnten, während der Textproduktion jedoch im wesentlichen aus der Sicht eines anderen heraus schreiben mußten. Zu diesem Beleg ist zweierlei anzumerken. consideration. Thus, while man beachte, dass has only one meaning or function—that of indicating a warning— es ist zu beachten, dass appears to have two—that of indicating a warning and that of adding an important afterthought. Worse, *man merke an, dass, seemingly a perfectly admissible transformation of es ist anzumerken, dass, does not occur at all. Category 3 consists of first-person-plural imperatives or, to use the classical term, ‘hortatives’. The range of verbs capable of entering this pattern is somewhat wider than in English and French; typical examples are zusammenfassen, υeranschaulichen and festhalten. The German parenthetical clauses in category 4 are based on two interchangeable patterns: one is introduced by so followed by a finite verb, the other by wie followed by the subject or, in a passive clause, by a participle.

< previous page

page_78

next page >

< previous page

page_79

next page >

Page 79 Table 2.21 Subcategories of category 1 (anticipatory es+verb phrase) Category 1: anticipatory es+ verb phrase 1.1es+verb es+steht fest, dass/erstaunt, dass/gilt, dass/gilt (+zu-inf.)/liegt nahe, dass/ kommt hinzu, phrase+complement- dass/fragt sich, ob/leuchtet ein, dass/scheint, dass/stellt sich heraus, dass/fällt auf, clause fragment dass/geht darum, dass/ kommt darauf an, wie/stellt sich heraus, dass/stimmt, dass/erstaunt, dass/kommt erschwerend hinzu, dass/ist so, dass/ spricht viel dafür, dass/stimmt, dass/ verwundert, dass/ könnte sein, dass/fragt sich, ob/kann passieren, dass/bleibt noch 1.2es+verb es ist anzumerken, dass (sein/bleiben/stehen/ es verdient betont zu werden, dass verdienen/…)+infinitive clause 1.3es+sei+past participle es sei bemerkt, dass 1.4es+auxiliary verb+past es darf (muss) angenommen werden, dass participle 1.5es+sich ohne Übertreibung läßt sich behaupten lassen+infinitive 1.6es+copular verb (sein/ es ist unnötig zu sagen, dass scheinen/…)+adjective/ es ist nicht verwunderlich, dass participle+complement-es erscheint bemerkenswert, dass (bemerkenswert erscheint, dass) clause fragment es scheint ausgeschlossen, dass es wäre (jedoch) zu kurz gegriffen,… 1.7es+verb phrase+noun es stellt sich die Frage, ob phrase es spielt keine Rolle, ob Thus, an impersonal SLDM such as es wird häufig angenommen, dass may be used in a parenthetical clause in one of two ways: Nun ist ja, so wird häufig angenommen or nun ist ja, wie häufig angenommen wird,... Category 5 is made up of infinitive clauses introduced by um. Unlike English infinitive clauses, they must be attached to a main clause—if sometimes only by means of a colon. Just as in English and French, the sentence adverbs in category 6 formed by adding the suffix -weise, are a particularly productive pattern. Here are a few illustrative examples culled from CAG: beispielsweise, bemerkenswerterweise, berechtigterweise, bezeichnenderweise, erfreulicherweise, fatalerweise, idealerweise, interessanterweise, konsequenterweise, paradoxerweise, υerständlicherweise, überraschenderweise. The nominal constructions in category 7 are based around general abstract nouns such as Schwierigkeit or Einschränkung and a copular verb. The range of nouns capable of displaying this pattern is fairly large in German.

< previous page

page_79

next page >

< previous page

page_80

next page >

Page 80 Category 8, which contains verbless clauses of various types, is moderately common both in academic and newspaper German. Some of these clauses are almost totally fixed, consisting of nothing more than a prepositional phrase ([noch einmal] zur Erinnerung:); others allow greater variation ([nun] noch ein Wort/eine Bemerkung zu...). As already noted, verbless constructions such as these make for greater economy of expression. The participial and gerund clauses in category 9 are a prolific source of German SLDMs. They constitute grammatically independent clauses which do not require subject identification. Sometimes a construction involving a present participle may serve the same function as one involving a past participle, as is the case with zusammengefasst and zusammenfassend . Examples: Zusammengefaßt läßt sich festhalten, daß wir auch bei der Forschung eine gute Startposition für den Wettbewerb haben...(CAG) Zusammenfassend läßt sich festhalten, daß Verarbeitungsziele maßge-blich zur Kohärenzbildung beitragen können...(CAG) It is also worthy of note that German participles such as zusammengefasst can be used on their own, thus acting as equivalents to entire clauses. Zusammenfassend: Auf regionaler Ebene können die Unternehmen nun zwischen einer Vielzahl von Ausbildungs- und Qualifizierungs-maßnahmen wählen...(CAG) Category 10 is remarkable in that it contains clause-fragment SLDMs based around syntactically deviant expressions such as man kann nicht umhin and its variant man kommt nicht umhin . These are followed by an infinitive introduced by zu; the verbs acting as complements are quite variable. Examples: Denn man kann wohl nicht umhin, in Verben wie υerbringen die im direkten Objekt ausgedrückte Zeitangabe als ‘Figur’ (und nicht als ‘Grund’) des dargestellten Sachverhalts zu bezeichnen. (CAG) Man kommt deshalb nicht umhin, dem Photo in diesem Zusammenhang eine gewisse innovative Funktion zuzusprechen. (CAG) Category 11 comprises variable prepositional phrases such as aus diesem (einem) Grund. As already noted for English items of this kind, these are lexicalized expressions whose variability is so restricted that they may just as well be subsumed under set expressions. Category 12 comprises restricted noun-verb collocations of the type analoges gilt für or die Erfahrung zeigt, dass.

< previous page

page_80

next page >

< previous page

page_81

next page >

Page 81 Table 2.22 Sentence-integrated markers in German Category Examples 1 noun phrase+verb phrase ein flüchtiger Blick auf…zeigt relatives Einverständnis besteht darüber, dass die Vermutung liegt nahe, dass das Gesagte bedeutet, dass Beweis dafür ist (angefangen) von…über…bis hin zu… spannt sich der Bogen 2sentence-like units solche Beispiele ließen sich beliebig vermehren 2.3.3.3 Sentence-integrated markers Unlike linear English and French constructions, the German brace construction may render the recognition of sentence-integrated markers more difficult than in English or French (see Table 2.22). Beyond this, there is not much here that differs from either French or English.

< previous page

page_81

next page >

< previous page

page_82

next page >

Page 82 3 Identifying meanings and functions An attempt at a functional taxonomy of SLDMs Il faut beaucoup de philosophie pour savoir observer une fois ce qu’on voit tous les jours. Jean-Jacques Rousseau 3.1 Introduction The preceding chapter presented a structural taxonomy of SLDMs. However, as common sense suggests, such a taxonomy does not allow us to establish translational equivalences (for further detail, see Siepmann 2000:275–281). Instead, correspondences between source and target-language markers must be inferred from functional similarities in their contextual or ‘discoursal’ uses. The present chapter therefore provides a brief review of the literature on discourse relations and then goes on to present a functional taxonomy of SLDMs. This taxonomy arises directly from the textual evidence rather than from preconceived theoretical notions, as was the case in many previous studies. Each category of SLDM will be briefly defined and exemplified. Detailed consideration of three specific categories is deferred until Chapter 4; this chapter contents itself with discussing general points of interest arising from the taxonomy: the multiple category membership exhibited by some SLDMs, the relationship between SLDMs and one-word connectives, as well as the existence of a hitherto unexplored class of collocations which may be termed ‘long-distance’ collocations. 3.2 Language functions and textual relations The attempt to classify language functions and textual relations has generated a literature which is far too extensive to review in detail here. Most of the relevant studies attempt to establish a relationship between the coherence relations obtaining at the propositional or referential levels and their surface cues, including discourse markers (for a recent overview, see Oates 1999; cf. also Blumenthal 1980; Roulet et al . 1991; Mann and

< previous page

page_82

next page >

< previous page

page_83

next page >

Page 83 Thompson 1988; Hoey 1991; Martin 1992; Halliday 1994; Winter 1994; Hyland 1998, 1999a, 1999b). Interestingly, while there is significant disagreement on how to classify particular single-word markers and some variation in the methods developed for this purpose, such disagreement tends to obfuscate a greater consensus on general types of coherence relations. Two major groups may be distinguished on the basis of the literature. • Group 1 comprises relations establishing a link between discourse units that describe ‘real-world’ states and processes. These are variously called ‘ideationar, ‘semantic’, ‘content’, ‘external’, ‘subject-matter’ or ‘propositional’ relations. Examples are ‘cause and effect’, ‘sequence’, ‘contrast’, and so on. • Group 2 contains relations establishing a link between the illocutionary force of one discourse unit and the locutionary meaning of another. These are variously called ‘interpersonal, ‘pragmatic’, ‘internal’, ‘rhetorical, ‘procedural’, ‘presentational’ or ‘metadiscursive’ relations. Examples are ‘criticizing’, ‘justifying’, ‘concluding’, etc. This broad classification may then give rise to more detailed sub-classification. Thus, Hyland’s (1998) schema (see Table 3.1), a refined extension of Crismore et al. (1993), takes up the above distinction between two types of metadiscourse, while further subdividing the functions of these. The two major types of metadiscourse are defined as follows: textual metadiscourse ‘refers to devices which allow the recovery of the writer’s intention by explicitly establishing preferred interpretations of propositional meanings’; interpersonal metadiscourse ‘alerts readers to the author’s perspective towards both the propositional information and the readers themselves, thus contributing to a writer-reader relationship and anticipating the subjective negatability of statements’. Before discussing the problems associated with such classification, let us first consider a selective synopsis of the great variety of taxonomies established so far, most of which take account of only a small number of SLDMs, or none at all (see Table 3.2). Overly crude classifications, such as Crismore and Farnsworth’s (1990), derived from Vande Kopple’s (1985), have not been taken account of here. The table is not meant to suggest that different authors merely give different names to what are essentially the same categories; rather, it selects some common discourse markers dealt with by most authors and shows the varying levels of delicacy at which these have been treated. Somewhat disappointingly, neither the distinction between propositional and metadiscursive relations discussed at the beginning of this section nor the metadiscourse taxonomies just presented are particularly helpful when considering real text. Associated with them are two main risks, or problems; I shall briefly review these and explain how I have tried to tackle each of them.

< previous page

page_83

next page >

< previous page

Page 84 Table 3.1 Hyland’s classification of functions of metadiscourse in academic texts Category Function Textual metadiscourse Logical connectives Express semantic relation between main clauses Frame markers Explicitly refer to discourse acts or text stages Endophoric markers Refer to information in other parts of the text Evidentials Refer to source of information from other texts Code glosses Help readers grasp meanings of ideational material Interpersonal metadiscourse Hedges Withhold writer’s full commitment to statements Emphatics Emphasize force or writer’s certainty in message Attitude markers Express writer’s attitude to propositional content Relational markers Explicitly refer to or build relationship with reader Person markers Explicit reference to author(s) Source: adapted from Hyland (1998:442)

< previous page

next page >

page_84

page_84

Examples in addition/but/therefore/thus finally/to repeat/Our aim here noted above/see Fig. 1/table 2 according to X/Y, 1990/Z states namely/e.g./in other words/such as might/perhaps/it is possible/about in fact/definitely/It is clear surprisingly/I agree/X claims frankly/note that/you can see I/we/my/mine/our

next page >

< previous page

page_85

next page >

Page 85 Table 3.2 Classifications of discourse markers Examples Vande Kopple Hyland Hutz (1997) Fraser (1988) (1985) (1998) In addition, but, Text connectives Logical Causality and result Message relationship markers: therefore, thus, and connectivesOpposition and Contrast elaborative, contrastive, inferential, Addition parallel Comparison Exemplification Restriction and condition Finally, to repeat, our Action markers, Frame Text structuring (as Discourse activity markers: clarifying, aim here, in sum, text connectives markers noted earlier) conceding, explaining, interrupting, overall (e.g. sequencers) Summary and repeating, sequencing, summarizing generalization (in sum) Order of importance (first, next, finally) Chronological order (then) Noted above, see Fig. — Endophoric Text Structuring Topic markers 1, below, the markers following According to, Fraser Narrators, Evidentials — Topic markers 1990, Sinclair states Attributors In other words, Code glosses Code Specification (in Topic markers, (elaborative) message specifically, such as, (defining, glosses particular) Explanation relationship markers, (explanatory) namely explaining, (in other words, in this discourse activity markers limiting) sense) Might, perhaps, it is Modality markers: Hedges Degree of probability — possible, about, hedges (perhaps, possibly, would, seem, tends to probably) Indeed, in fact, it is Modality markers: Emphatics Emphasis Topic markers, message relationship clear, obvious, even emphatics markers Surprisingly, I agree, Attitude markers Attitude Manner Message relationship markers X claims, it is markers, fortunate that Frankly, note that, Attitude markers Relational — Message relationship markers you can see Commentary markers I, we, my, mine, our — Person —(dealt with in a — markers separate section)

< previous page

page_85

next page >

< previous page

page_86

next page >

Page 86 The first problem is one of methodology. Most of the available taxonomies depend too heavily on top-down analysis to be reliable; they are frequently grounded on time-honoured grammatical categories and an insufficient empirical base. None of the studies cited above provide more than a handful of examples to illustrate their categorization, while most furnish no examples at all. In other words, the question remains unanswered as to how the analyst arrives at his interpretation of the discourse relation cued by a particular marker. To address this issue, any new analysis of markers must therefore proceed from the bottom up, as already suggested in Chapter 1. The linguist’s intuitive classificatory decisions should be refined through substitution and paraphrase tests, i.e. by substituting SLDMs with single-word markers and by paraphrasing in terms of RST the relations cued by SLDMs. The results of such bottom-up analysis can then be compared with the set of general categories that has emerged from previous studies. The final step is to revise existing categories or set up new ones. The present study derives additional authority from the collation of data from several languages, whereas in previous studies analysis was usually restricted to just one language. The second problem concerns the linguist’s semantic intuitions. There are actually two separate points to be considered here. One is that the neat compartmentalizing of meanings or functions can do no more than partially capture a complex reality in which any single-word marker or SLDM may express more than one discourse relation. Let us consider a few examples. Hyland (1998) includes the SLDM it is clear that under the category of ‘emphatics’, a subcategory of ‘interpersonal metadiscourse’ which implies ‘certainty’ and emphasizes ‘the force of the proposition’. While it is correct that certainty and forcefulness partake of the meaning of it is clear, Hyland (1998) totally neglects its role as an inferrer (for examples of it is clear in this role, see Section 4.3), probably because he bases his classification on pure intuition rather than detailed observation of actual text. In its inferential mode, however, it is clear manifestly resembles first-level markers such as therefore and would thus fall within the ambit of Hyland’s ‘textual metadiscourse’. By the same token, not all items that Hyland refers to as ‘person markers’ can be classified under the heading ‘interpersonal metadiscourse’: it is inconceivable to refer to a concluder such as une demière remarque sur (a ‘frame marker’ in Hyland’s terminology) as ‘textual metadiscourse’, while at the same time including the functionally close nous terminons en indiquant in the opposing category of ‘interpersonal metadiscourse’, purely because it contains a personal pronoun. Although Hyland (1998:444) himself acknowledges, at least to some extent, the fuzzy boundaries between his two major categories of ‘textual metadiscourse’ and ‘interpersonal metadiscourse’, he does not take his reasoning to its logical conclusion, which would mean abandoning such broad categorization altogether. Ultimately, then, even the line between propo-

< previous page

page_86

next page >

< previous page

page_87

next page >

Page 87 sitional and metadiscursive relations may be difficult to draw; some authors (e.g. Halliday 1978) explicitly view the various planes of discourse as existing simultaneously, and this is probably the soundest approach. The second point about intuition has already been touched upon in Chapter 1: in the area of pragmatic concepts, any definition is at least to some extent expressive of the linguist’s personal world-view and experience. Thus, in his ground-breaking study of French connectors, Grieve (1996) takes issue with French dictionary makers on a number of points, including the function of the structure d’une part…d’autre part: The definition of its function given in Robert requires some modification: employé pour mettre en parallèle, pour opposer deux idées ou deux faits, deux aspects d’un objet. Most writers nowadays do not use this connector pour opposer deux idées . They use it to link two points which are parallel or complementary to each other. (Grieve 1996:238) It is easy to see how Grieve subtly shifts the emphasis from opposition to parallelism, although both aspects are equally present in most instances of the connector. Examples of such definitional uncertainty abound. Thus, the adverb surprisingly is a connective expressing manner for Hutz (1997:175), whereas it comes under the scope of attitude markers for Hyland (1998:442). Similarly, Hyland (1998, 1999a, 1999b) sees note that as a relational marker, i.e. a device that explicitly addresses readers, ‘either by selectively focusing their attention or by including them as participants in the text situation’, whereas Swales et al. (1998) describe it as an attention-getting device designed to set an emphatic tone in order to draw the reader’s attention to a crucial or unexpected argument, something that Hyland would describe as an ‘emphatic’. We must conclude from all this that the subjectivity of the analyst is bound to impact on any taxonomy of SLDMs, but that the resultant uncertainties can be minimized through the use of a large sample of authentic data. 3.3 A taxonomy of SLDMs With the above considerations in mind, I shall now suggest my own taxonomy of the material drawn from the corpus sources described in Chapter 2. As already noted, two points in particular militate in favour of this taxonomy. First, the detailed textual evidence compiled over long years of research allows a higher degree of descriptive delicacy than could have been achieved in earlier work based on unaided intuition or a slim research base. Second, the taxonomy derives greater authority from being multilingual, whereas previous research has tended to be monolingual,

< previous page

page_87

next page >

< previous page

page_88

next page >

Page 88 mainly focusing on British and American English. It is important to remember, however, that the proposals set forth here are based on my semantic-pragmatic intuitions and may in their turn be subject to modification by other authors. In line with the above discussion, I assume that any discourse marker has only one primary function, while making proper allowance for the fact that many discourse markers also have a secondary function (see also Schiffrin 1987; Lenk 1998). This will be discussed in Section 3.4.1. Each functional category will now be briefly defined and exemplified. The examples have been randomly chosen to reflect a broad range of members of each category; hence also the selection of different SLDMs in each language rather than translation equivalents. For further delicacy, see the subsequent discussion of three categories singled out for in-depth cross-linguistic comparison (see Chapter 4). For further lexical detail on the categories not receiving in-depth treatment, see Gallagher et al. (in preparation). The analysis reveals that RST (Mann and Thompson 1988) is well suited to describing general relations between text spans containing, or linked by, second-level markers. What it cannot do, however, is help to establish distinctions between closely related types of markers. The elaboration relation, for example, was found to be encoded by announcers, topic initiators, digression markers and clarification markers. Such finer distinctions should therefore be incorporated into future versions of RST. Comparison and contrast markers (see Table 3.3) are SLDMs which allow the writer to point out similarities or differences between entities or ideas discussed in the previous and the ensuing discourse. In terms of RST both comparison and contrast are multi-nuclear relations. That is, the situations related by a comparison marker or a contrast marker are understood as (a) identical in at least some respects, (b) similar or different in a few respects and (c) are compared with respect to one or more of these similarities or differences (Mann and Thompson 1988:278). Similar relations are established by first-level markers such as likewise, equally and similarly . Concession markers (see Table 3.4) alert readers to a reversal in Table 3.3 Comparison and contrast markers English examples French examples German examples The same can be said for Où s’arrête…et où commence…? Hier hören die Gemeinsamkeiten auf. So with Compare this…with/to Analogously Même remarque sur/ pour Entsprechendes gilt für… Im gleichen Atemzug sind It is one thing…It is another… Il en va autrement de …zu nennen.

< previous page

page_88

next page >

< previous page

page_89

Page 89 Table 3.4 Concession markers English examples It would be a mistake (to +inf.)

French examples En admettant que… encore faut-il que…

[Although] it could be argued…, it is also worth remembering that…

…, direz-vous. Nous répondons que… on aura beau constater …, on ne sera pas pour

…[though] it is conceded that…

autant autorisé a (+inf.) si…, il faut bien voir que (NP), oui, mais(NP)

next page > German examples Nun wird man einwenden, dass… Dem kann aber folgendes entgegengehalten werden: … Bei nur oberflächlichem Hinsehen… Zunächst ist es vielleicht verwunderlich, dass…

[though] it is sometimes said that… on inspection perspective or result despite an adverse or promising condition which was mentioned or implied in the previous discourse. In traditional terms, we might say that a proposition P holds, implying the expectation of X, while on the other hand Q holds which implies not-X, contrary to the expectation induced by P (Grote et al. 1997:95). In terms of RST, concession can be described as a relation involving the following constraints: constraints on nucleus (N): writer (W) has positive regard for the situation presented in N constraints on satellite (S): W is not claiming that the situation presented in S doesn’t hold constraints on the N+S combination: writer acknowledges a potential or apparent incompatibility between the situations presented in N and S; W regards the situations presented in N and S as compatible; recognizing that the compatibility between the situations presented in N and S increases R’s positive regard for the situation presented in N the effect: R’s positive regard for the situation presented in N is increased. (Mann and Thompson 1988:254) The category of concession markers includes markers introducing the nucleus as well as markers introducing the satellite. It is quite common for nucleus and satellite markers to enter into high-probability long-distance collocations (see p. 103). Related first-level markers, which often co-occur with the SLDMs in question, are but, howeυer, although, yet, etc. Exemplifiers (see Table 3.5) belong to a set of devices of which the first-level marker for example is the paradigm. Exemplifiers and exemplification will be discussed in greater detail in Section 4.1. Explainers (see Table 3.6) are so named because they allow the writer to provide an explanation for a statement made in the previous discourse. That is, they refer to moves by the writer to supply additional information

< previous page

page_89

next page >

< previous page Page 90 Table 3.5 Exemplifiers English examples as with To paint an extreme example, consider As an example For the sake of illustration Table 3.6 Explainers English examples This is because The explanation seems to be that

next page >

page_90 French examples Soit: Prenons un seul exemple. Pour prendre un exemple adjectival Qu’il suffise de citer French examples Expliquons-nous. On peut en donner l’illustration suivante.

German examples Zur Illustration des eben Ausgeführten stehen… Dazu folgende Beispiele: Vergegenwärtigen wir uns dies am Beispiel des… German examples Dies ergibt sich daraus, dass Dies läßt sich dadurch erklären, dass

Let us now see why Table 3.7 Definers English examples French examples German examples An X is a Y such that… Le X est un Y si l’on a: X meint Y Narrowly defined by this is meant for want of a better term (we Disons donc, avec [name], que X gelten begrifflich shall use) Il est d’usage en TALN de als parler de ESF liegt vor, wenn Let X denote Y Let P1 be…Let P2 be intended to help the reader form a fuller understanding of, or comprehend the reasons for, a situation presented in the previous discourse. In terms of RST, explainers usually introduce the satellite of an evidence or a justify relation, where the reader’s comprehension of the satellite increases, respectively, his belief of the nucleus or his readiness to accept the writer’s right to present the nucleus (Mann and Thompson 1988:251–252). It is noteworthy that, with this group, there are no first-level markers representing the paradigm. Definers (see Table 3.7) introduce definitions, terminology or theorems. In terms of RST, they may signal several different restatement relations (Mann and Thompson 1988:277) between two stretches of text: identity (X is equal to Y in one or more respects), difference (X is different from Y in one or more respects), inclusion/exclusion (X can be defined in terms of the superordinate notion Y) and process (X arises

< previous page

page_90

next page >

< previous page

page_91

next page >

Page 91 from, or is caused by, Y; Marco 1999). Sometimes these types are mixed in the one definition. Enumerators (see Table 3.8) indicate that a stretch of text is to be viewed as an item in a total or series. They may do so prospectively, thus performing an additive function (beyond this), or retrospectively, thus signalling a text boundary (this is only part of the picture). One-word counterparts of these SLDMs include first(ly), also, and . In terms of RST, we are dealing with a list relation. Summarizers and concluders (see Table 3.9) may be seen as a subcategory of enumerators. They serve either to introduce the last item in a series or to conclude such a series or list. In terms of RST, summarizers such as alles in allem encode a summary relation, where the nucleus must be more than one unit whose content is restated by a satellite which is smaller in scope than the nucleus (Mann and Thompson 1988:277). Concluders such as a final point can introduce a variety of relations, depending on their specific semantic content, but the most common is the list relation. Inferrers (see Table 3.10) provide transition from one or more statements considered as true to another, the truth of which is believed to follow from the former. Typical one-word inferrers include thus and therefore . Inferrers receive in-depth treatment in Section 4.3. Table 3.8 Enumerators English examples French examples German examples (First) we should consider Signalons (enfin) Oder aber Beyond this Pour commencer Damit ist…noch nicht erschöpft. Or again Reste… This is only part of the picture. Enfin et surtout Autre illustration: Es ließe sich hinzufügen, dass One (point/reason/ factor) is that Inutile d’ajouter que It should be added that Table 3.9 Summarizers and concluders English examples French examples German examples A final point: Une dernière remarque sur Alles in allem: It remains for me (+to-inf.) Nous terminons en indiquant Bleibt letztens noch… Zusammengefaßt: In conclusion, I would say that Il nous reste a (+inf.) Der vorliegende Abschnitt ergab Such instances could be multiplied. To round off this picture

< previous page

page_91

next page >

< previous page

page_92

next page >

Page 92 Table 3.10 Inferrers English examples French examples German examples So it turns out that Il ressort de ce qui précède que Das Gesagte bedeutet, dass We conclude that This is not to imply that Il découle de ces constatations que Wir entnehmen daraus, dass It follows from this that It is clear from the foregoing that C’est dire que Aus diesen The corollary of this is that On peut en conclure que Vorbemerkungen ergibt sich bereits Table 3.11 Cause and reason markers English examples French examples German examples A number of factors account for Deux raisons à cela Pourquoi? Pour deux Dies vielleicht der Grund dafür, this. raisons… dass There are two main reasons for Es spricht einiges dafür, dass this. This is because… Der Grund liegt darin, dass Cause and reason markers (see Table 3.11), as their name implies, link two stretches of text, one of which is to be perceived as (explaining) the cause of, or reason for, the other. In terms of RST, this can usually be described as a non-volitional cause relation, where the following constraints obtain: constraints on N: presents a situation that is not a volitional action constraints on the N+S combination: S presents a situation that, by means other than motivating a volitional action, caused the situation presented in N; without the presentation of S, R might not know the particular cause of the situation; a presentation of N is more central than S to W’s purposes in putting forth the N−S combination. (Mann and Thompson 1988:275) Alternatively, a non-volitional result relation may obtain: constraints on S: presents a situation that is not a volitional action constraints on the N+S combination: N presents a situation that caused the situation presented in S; presentation of N is more central to W’s purposes in putting forth the N−S combination than is the presentation of S. (Mann and Thompson 1988:275–276)

< previous page

page_92

next page >

< previous page

page_93

next page >

Page 93 Announcers (see Table 3.12) share a range of behaviour in preparing the reader for the next step in the author’s exposition or reasoning (I will now briefly describe), or indicate topic shifts (consideration of…must be left until…). The category also includes items used to signal discourse goals (my purpose is) . In terms of RST, the discourse preceded by the announcer (N) and the ensuing discourse (S) stand in an elaboration relation, where ‘S presents additional detail about the situation or some element of subject matter which is presented in N or inferentially accessible in N’ (Mann and Thompson 1988:273). Topic initiators (see Table 3.13) are so called because they initiate a new (sub)topic in the current text. They might equally well be referred to as topic shifters, since topic initiation usually involves topic shift, with the exception of text beginnings. In terms of RST, this is another example of an elaboration relation. Excluders (see Table 3.14) indicate that a point mentioned in the previous discourse might be elaborated upon, but that such elaboration is inappropriate or impossible in the subsequent discourse, or indeed within the framework of the current study. Since these items signal a rather complex discourse operation, the SLDMs in this category have no one-word equivalents. This relation seems to have escaped the attention of RST theorists. Table 3.12 Announcers English examples French examples German examples I will now briefly describe Je propose de passer en Im vorliegenden Aufsatz wird Consideration of…must be left until… revue argumentiert, dass Nous verrons que Es soll gezeigt werden …, a point discussed separately below Nous esquissons cidessousIch möchte hier… untersuchen… Before proceeding Bevor wir uns… zuwenden Meantime (it should be understood that) my purpose is Table 3.13 Topic initiators (or topic shifters) English examples French examples German examples It is often said that Abordons maintenant Womit wir bei…wären. Now consider Première remarque: Das führt unmittelbar zu/ auf Turning to Il est temps de (+inf.) The moment will now have been reached where Passons à Es wird häufig gesagt, dass

< previous page

page_93

next page >

< previous page

page_94

next page >

Page 94 Digression markers (see Table 3.15) signal that the writer is about to stray from the main topic. They may be regarded as a subgroup of topic initiators. Here too we may speak of an elaboration relation (see p. 20). The high frequency and habitual co-presence of question and answer markers (see Table 3.16) reflect the dialogic nature of much academic text, engaging the writer in an exchange with herself as well as with the reader. Answer markers are often realized as zero connectors, but may also be spelled out. Question markers may also be made more or less implicit by means of a bare question mark; this is less frequent in English and German than in French. In terms of RST, we are dealing with a solutionhood relation, where the satellite presents a problem whose solution is presented in the nucleus (Mann and Thompson 1988:272). Table 3.14 Excluders English examples French examples German examples Space limitations preclude … Excluons toutefois le cas Auf…kann und möchte ich hier nicht de… eingehen. We have space enough to mention only a Nous n’insisterons pas sur Aus Platzgründen… few. La place nous manque pour Es ist hier jedoch nicht der This is not the place Ort (+inf.) I will here restrict myself to (+V−ing) Ce n’est pas le lieu de Ich beschränke mich hier auf Ici, bornons-nous à Sans entrer dans le détail Es bleibt späteren Arbeiten vorbehalten,… de… Table 3.15 Digression markers English examples French examples German examples It should be mentioned in Notons au passage que Zur Vermeidung möglichen passing that… Soit dit en passant consider, for a digressive A propos de…, nous aimerions ouvrir une Mißverständnisses sei bemerkt, dass dies page or two,… incidentally parenthèse directement reliée à notre sujet nur am Rande nebenbei bemerkt Table 3.16 Question and answer markers English examples French examples German examples The question then arises: Question: …—so bleibt am Schluß zu fragen. How, then, may we explain …? Le tout est de savoir si Pourquoi? Warum aber, so wird man sich fragen,… The next obvious question is La question qui se pose alors est: Die zentrale Frage ist The answer may lie in… Die Antwort dürfte lauten:

< previous page

page_94

next page >

< previous page

page_95

next page >

Page 95 Emphasizers (see Table 3.17) draw the reader’s attention to a salient or unexpected aspect of the topic under discussion. Emphasizers such as on inspection may be said to have dual category membership, as they often occur in concessive structures. They may signal several different RST relations, including elaboration, contrast and concession (see p. 20). Informers (see Table 3.18) serve to introduce new information; they are based around verbs of saying and perceiving or related nouns (point, mot, Wort). They are closely related to topic initiators, enumerators and summarizers/concluders, and may signal the same relations as the latter. Clarification markers (see Table 3.19) may be considered a subcategory of informers or emphasizers whose primary function is to clarify the meaning or purpose of a particular text span. They usually encode restatement or elaboration relations (see p. 20). Any academic writer wishes to gain acceptance for the ideas, arguments or findings presented in her text, and one of the ways to achieve such acceptance, is by using suggestors. Suggestors (see Table 3.20) allow writers to present a message in such a way that it appears self-evident and incontestably true, the expectation being that the reader will take it on trust. They often encode evidence or justify relations (see p. 20). Suggestors will be given pride of place in Siepmann (forthcoming). As their names suggest, hypothesis and model markers (see Table 3.21) are used to introduce the formulation of a hypothesis or to mark the Table 3.17 Emphasizers English examples French examples German examples It must be noted that Encore faut-il remarquer Bemerkenswert erscheint, dass It must be emphasized that note que that/Note NP Notons que Man beachte, dass Notice (also/for example) that/Notice NP Voyons la chose de plus Es verdient schließlich noch betont zu werden, près. dass Contrast NP Il faut être bien conscient Compare…, noting… on inspection que bei genauem Zusehen (my emphases) Précisons que (c’est moi qui précise) Table 3.18 Informers English examples French examples German examples It should be recognized that Pour information, retenons que Dazu ist festzustellen, dass A first point is that Un mot sur la terminologie Es ist noch anzumerken, dass Schließlich sei noch Trois points à dégager: darauf hingewiesen, dass

< previous page

page_95

next page >

< previous page

page_96

next page >

Page 96 Table 3.19 Clarification markers English examples French examples German examples But that is not the point. Soyons bien clair. Um es in aller The (key) point is that Entendons: Deutlichkeit zu sagen: im Klartext: Table 3.20 Suggestors English examples French examples German examples One thing is certain: Il est sûr que Manches deutet darauf hin, It will be readily seen that Il va sans dire que rien n’est dass It is fair to say that a moment’s reflection moins sûr Die Erfahrung spricht dafür, suggests that Force est de constater que dass it is widely accepted that On comprend mal comment Es ist ohne weiteres einsichtig, dass Table 3.21 Hypothesis and model markers English examples French examples German examples It is a fair guess that On peut supposer que Es steht zu vermuten, dass I hypothesized that Supposons que Die Hypothese ist, dass Suppose that Soit Davon ausgehend, dass Assume that Wir nehmen an, dass Let us say that Die Vermutung liegt nahe, dass Let us imagine that beginning of a sequence in which a hypothetical situation will be described or a model set up. The most common relations cued by these markers are background and condition: Background constraints on N: R won’t comprehend N sufficiently before reading text of S constraints on the N+S combination: S increases the ability of R to comprehend an element in N. (Mann and Thompson 1988:273) Condition constraints on S: S presents a hypothetical, future or otherwise unrealized situation (relative to the situational context of S) constraints on the N+S combination: realization of the situation presented in N depends on realization of that presented in S. (Mann and Thompson 1988:276)

< previous page

page_96

next page >

< previous page

page_97

next page >

Page 97 Restrictors (see Table 3.22) are so called because they indicate a restric tion. More specifically, they signal that the stretch of discourse to which they refer reduces the ambit, or the significance, of either the preceding or the subsequent discourse. Common lexicalized restrictors include but, howeυer, anyway, in any case or at least, to name but a few English examples. This category has been given detailed consideration in Siepmann (2001a). Referrers and attributors (see Table 3.23) allow writers to mark material that is not their own and to attribute it to its source. Referrers, frequently appearing in footnotes, guide the reader towards a more extended discussion of a point just raised (for full details, see), whereas attributors (Meyer bemerkt) signal a citation, either reproducing in part or full one or more source texts, or summarizing the work of one or more fellow academics. Depending on the textual purpose of the reference, a wide variety of RST relations may be encoded by these markers. Reformulators and resumers (see Table 3.24) serve to reword the lexical content of a text span. The reformulation does not normally provide Table 3.22 Restrictors English examples French examples German examples To further confound the picture Un autre problème concerne Erschwerend kommt hinzu, dass To make matters worse Complication Noch schwerer wiegt, dass An allowance has to be made for supplémentaire, il y a un autre Einschränkend sei angemerkt, dass A further problem is that inconvénient à ce que A word of caution may be in order une réserve, néanmoins nous regrettons about que A word of warning about Table 3.23 Referrers and attributors English examples French examples German examples [name] argues [name] affirme que [name] hat darauf as [name] writes comme dit (excellemment) [name] hingewiesen, dass, so it has been seen that argumentieren [names] it has been proposed that [name] écrit ceci: , dit-il, nous renvoyons es ist bereits darauf verwiesen we briefly mentioned sur ce point à worden, dass [name] bemerkt: it was argued by historians that for full details, see some further pour une plus ample discussion de…, voir in Anlehnung an [name] consideration of…can be found in en nous inspirant de [name], disons im Anschluß an [name] following X borrowing from X Comme le précise [name]

< previous page

page_97

next page >

< previous page

page_98

next page >

Page 98 Table 3.24 Reformulators and resumers English examples French examples Put another way, Pour le dire en d’autres In other words termes In the [Marxist] idiom Tel [name] avouant To put it crudely , avons-nous dit also called j’ai cité précédemment as discussed revenons à to recapitulate: ainsi qu’il est dit plus haut rappelons que

German examples Anders ausgedrückt: Mit den Worten von [name] Grob gesprochen Wie eingangs dargestellt Von…war…die Rede. Um kurz zu rekapitulieren Erinnern wir daran, dass identical content; rather, it tends to provide additional information with a view to enhancing the reader’s understanding of the writer’s intended meaning. Reformulators will be given detailed consideration in Section 4.2. 3.4 Points of interest At least three points of interest emerge from this taxonomy of SLDMs. One is that the boundaries between some types of SLDM are quite fluid, so that some items may be said to have multiple category membership. The second point is that some SLDMs are functionally and semantically close to first-level markers, whereas others bear no such resemblance. A third point to note is the existence of lexical dependencies between markers, sometimes stretching over some considerable distance. Let us consider each of these points in turn. 3.4.1 Multiple category membership Discourse marker functions are neither totally discrete nor autonomous, any more than the meanings of individual words are. Indeed, it is by no means uncommon for SLDMs to have dual, triple or even quadruple category membership. The most obvious manifestation of this can be seen in strings of the type it is shown/said/argued that, which can be used as topic initiators, concession markers, suggestors, referrers and attributors (cf. Oakey 2002a). A few additional examples will make the dimensions of this phenomenon clearer. In the first example, explanatory and enumerative SLDMs have been combined to produce the plain, step-by-step reasoning typical of analytical and discursive French prose: Certes, bien des pères de l’Eglise rejettent les auteurs païens, comme inutiles et dangereux; mais ils admettent la langue et la rhétorique des païens…Pourquoi? Pour deux raisons. La première est que l’Eglise, dans son rôle missionnaire et dans ses

< previous page

page_98

next page >

< previous page

page_99

next page >

Page 99 polémiques, ne pouvait se passer de la rhétorique, pas plus que de la langue… La seconde raison est que la Bible elle-même est profondément rhétorique. Ne foisonne-t-elle pas en métaphores, allégories, jeux de mots, antithèses, argumentations, autant sinon plus que les textes grecs? (CAF) Enumerators and informers may also be mixed in the one SLDM; witness the following example: What makes one translation more ‘successful’ than another, how can the analytic apparatus developed in this book, together with the model for which it is to operate, embracing the concepts and distinctions discussed above, in fact give us an assessment of translation quality? A first point is that there is no scientific basis for determining that a given source text requires a translation of the one kind or the other by virtue of its status, function, content or anything else. (CAE) Other amalgams do not require lengthy exemplification. It is immediately obvious that markers such as le parallèle s’arrête là/da hören die Gemeinsamkeiten auf function simultaneously as enumerators, contrast markers and topic initiators. Similarly, exemplifiers such as on pourrait multiplier les exemples may equally well be described as topic concluders. Referrers and announcers may also be mixed in the one phrase: described below are, as may topic initiators and announcers: in this article I discuss. Equally plain is the combination of enumeration and exemplification in such phrases as autre illustration. Concluders and informers are also often combined: pour clore cette réflexion+un mot de terminologie; en résumé+on peut dire que . The same holds true for the relationship between concluders and exemplifiers: pour terminer sur ce point+υoici deux autres exemples. Multiple category membership can probably best be accounted for in terms of prototype theory (Rosch 1973; Moon 1987; Aitchison 1994), an explanation of the way in which extensional meanings are represented in the mental lexicon. Prototype theory argues that the mental lexicon categorizes words into groups on the basis of a range of typicality criteria. This makes it relatively easy to decide on prototypes of particular classes of nouns, while still allowing the linguist to account for peripheral category members. Thus, the thrush would count as a prototype of bird; the ostrich and the penguin, although unable to fly, would count as peripheral exemplars of the category since they exhibit other bird-like features. Similar considerations apply to multi-word combinations such as SLDMs. Assuming the key feature of an exemplifier is that it introduces a fact, incident, quotation, etc. that illustrates, or forms a particular case of, the situation described in the previous discourse, then the exemplifier an

< previous page

page_99

next page >

< previous page

page_100

next page >

Page 100 example is proυided by is a prototypical case: in any context imaginable, the use of the exemplifier will invariably fit the definition. The same cannot be said, for example, of the imperative see, although it may well assume an exemplificatory function. See can only introduce quotations or citations, thus fulfilling only part of the defining criteria. 3.4.2 Collocation of first-leυel and second-level markers The broad taxonomy presented above suggests that a basic distinction can be established between those discourse markers that are semantically related to first-level markers and those that are not. For example, as shown in Siepmann (2001a), multi-word restrictors introducing an adverse point such as a complication is that are closely related to the function of such one-word restrictors as but or however . On the other hand, a moment’s reflection shows that such items as topic initiators (it is often said that, turning to) serve highly specific functions unrelated to those of first-level connectors. A detailed comparison of the relations cued by first-level and second-level markers requires prior studies of both types of marker. What can be said at this stage in our investigation is that there are preferred combinations of firstlevel markers with SLDMs. This implies that the two types of marker have differing but complementary functions; witness the following French examples: précisons que+néanmoins mentionnons+ici notons+encore ajoutons seulement ici que soulignons+toutefois rappelons+en effet on sait+en effet force est de constater que+cependant toute la question est de savoir+donc il est clair que+cependant The random listing above is based on a wealth of corpus evidence suggesting that combinations of one-word and second-level markers are the more likely the more specific the function of the SLDM is: in other words, that said and howeυer combine less frequently than it should be borne in mind and howeυer because the former are functionally closer than the latter. 3.4.3 Lexical dependencies between SLDMs and implications for the idiom principle Apart from collocations between first-level and second-level markers, there exist lexical dependencies between different types of SLDMs. The

< previous page

page_100

next page >

< previous page

page_101

next page >

Page 101 restrictor with this in mind, for example, co-occurs significantly with topic initiators such as let us turn to, let us revisit or I now come to, as illustrated in the following example: If the subject matter exists, it must be true. Therefore, every utterance is true since it *names* its subject matter. The relation between these two problems should be evident. If we can resolve how it is possible to speak of negated or non-existent referents, then the problem of falsehood should become manageable. With this in mind, let us turn to Pelletier’s and Denyer’s treatment of the problems. (CAE) Likewise c’est-à-dire collocates with en l’occurrence and its variants en l’espèce and en la circonstance. These variants act to restrict the scope of the intensional definition provided: le commentateur applique à son corpus les critères de rationalité que lui-même tient pour les plus appropriés en philosophie, c’est-à-dire en l’occurrence ceux-là mêmes qui ont cours dans les discussions actuelles de la philosophie analytique. (CAF) In parallel fashion, SLDMs may enter into collocation with other word classes. The reformulator υoire is a case in point; it forms a strong collocation with the adverbs carrément, franchement and tout court: Des artistes contemporains majeurs, appartenant notamment à l’école de Paris, sont sous-représentés, voire carrément absents. (NF) This kind of collocational pattern, of which further evidence will be adduced in Chapter 4, has so far gone more or less unnoticed. This is probably because previous work on collocation (e.g. Hausmann et al. 1989; Sinclair 1991:109– 122; Howarth 1996; Scherfer 2001) has narrowly focused on the co-occurrence of single words belonging to a restricted range of word classes (usually nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs) rather than multi-word units. It is my contention that, as corpora grow, evidence will accumulate of lexical dependencies between text spans from the single word to the sentence. This will entail a stronger version of the idiom principle posited by Sinclair, whereby ‘the choice of one word affects the choice of others in its vicinity’ (Sinclair 1991:173). This new version will have to make allowances for what we might term ‘collocational combinations’, stating that ‘the choice of one word or phraseological unit affects the choice of other words or phraseological units in their vicinity’. Other evidence from this study necessitates an even more radical widening of the idiom principle’s scope, for the lexical dependencies in question manifest themselves not only between immediately adjacent items, but also over greater distances. A convenient illustration is provided

< previous page

page_101

next page >

< previous page

page_102

next page >

Page 102 by the topic initiator turning to, which is commonly followed at some distance by informers such as I/we+find/see/note or it appears that: Turning to the use of semi-auxiliary is to/are to in if -clauses, we find that a fifth of the instances in the sample (and 1340 in the corpus as a whole) appear in this syntactic environment. (CAE) In this respect the speech of younger British speakers appears to be following the lead of American English. Turning to the speech of older speakers, we note some words which are suggestive of hesitation, uncertainty or turn manipulation: well, mm, er. (CAE) The corresponding Middle High German forms are fuoss, füesse; mus, müse . Modern German Fuss: Füsse, Maus: Mäuse are the regular developments of these medieval forms. Turning to Anglo-Saxon, we find that our modern English forms correspond to fot, fet; mus, mys. (CAE) Turning to requirements involving both age plus service, it appears there has been an increase in the propensity of participants to have normal retirement available at age 62 with a combination of years of service. (CAE) A similar phenomenon can be observed with the marker of comparison any more than. This marker, which introduces a subordinate clause, is always preceded by the negative particle not in the main clause: Not all women are ‘carers’ any more than all women are Victims’ or ‘contractors’. (CAE) Such examples could be multiplied; they force us to recognize that, in order to account for at least some collocational links, it is necessary to abandon the four-word span on either side of the node which Sinclair (1991) postulates as the cut-off point for collocational significance. The idiom principle must therefore be further revised to accommodate ‘long-distance’ collocations entered by SLDMs. I therefore propose the following restatement of the idiom principle for written text: One of the main principles of the organization of text is that the choice of one word or phraseological unit affects the choice of other words or phraseological units, usually within a maximum span of several paragraphs. Collocation is one of the patterns of mutual choice, and idiom is another. (based on Sinclair 1991:173) This reformulation of the idiom principle also takes account of cases

< previous page

page_102

next page >

< previous page

page_103

next page >

Page 103 where there is a great deal of variation among the node and the collocate(s). One typical case is the collocation of the contrast marker not so with lexical items such as surely, seem, appear, you/one might think that, it was hoped that or one hears that: Volkswagen, which now owns 70 per cent of the Czech company, would have thought the Skoda’s identity problematic. Not so. VW sees Skoda as one of the most recognized brand names in advertising. (NE) After recriminations last summer, when a number of big trading houses were accused—nothing was ever proved—of the Stock Exchange had nipped things in the forcing the FTSE 100 higher ahead of options expiry dates, bud. Not so. Yesterday afternoon, after a solid if unspectacular morning’s business, shares in some of the biggest Footsie companies—the ones heavily weighted in the premier index—motored sharply upwards. (NE) Regulators and providers ought to be kept apart. Not so. according to the NRA’s board—and to Lord Crickhowell, who insists that water management and regulation are inextricably linked. (NE) So when some 100,000 demonstrators clogged the streets of the capital, Minsk, on April 10th to support striking industrial workers and to protest against price rises, it as if discontent had come out of the blue. Not so: beneath the surface the republic had been stirring for months. (NE) Here one might make a case for the collocation of underlying rhetorical strategies rather than strings of words. This would be correct to the extent that the discourse preceding not so sets up an expectation which is not fulfilled in the subsequent discourse. In actual fact, however, rhetorical strategy and use of lexis are two sides of the same linguistic coin. Language users make communicative choices, and such choices are inextricably linked with particular lexical material; indeed, it would be difficult to say which was historically prior: the strategy or the lexical pattern associated with it. Not surprisingly, the ‘expectation’ part of the above pattern may also be found in nominal form; in the following example from an academic text, you might think has been converted to the more formal noun misconception: Another about meditation is that the meditator should fall into a trance. Not so. As a famous Chinese Buddhist put it: There is a class of foolish people who sit quietly and try to keep their minds blank…(CAE)

< previous page

page_103

next page >

< previous page

page_104

next page >

Page 104 A more complex realization of a long-distance collocational pattern is seen in the following extract: But if one considers that in college dictionaries the average number of column-lines allotted to each entry (not each definition) is a bit less than two, one will see why space is at a premium. (CAE) In the present case the collocational relationship holds between two types of SLDM which occur in, respectively, the main clause and the subclause of a complex sentence: the topic shifter (if) one considers (+wh-clause/NP) and the suggestor one will see (+wh-clause/NP). Again, it is not so much the lexical items themselves which enter into collocation; rather, we are dealing with a recurrent type of semantic-functional relationship, where both the second and the first part of the collocation may be replaced by other lexical items. A few more examples follow: If one considers that the various paths do not exist except as perceived by some mind, then one immediately arrives at the conclusion that the probability of a path should be chosen proportionally to its algorithmic information. (CAE) If we consider the nature of Christian persecution as it is currently understood, we can easily see how the personal attitudes of the presiding official could have been a significant factor in any particular trial. (CAE) If, however, one reads the early dramas of Augustus Thomas and Clyde Fitch, it will be realized how dexterously the American playwright profited by the French technician in whom the commercial manager had faith. (CAE) French concession markers, too, are evidence of lexical dependencies operating across considerable spans of text. Thus, the concessive en admettant que tends to pre-empt the choice of an adversative marker such as pourtant, encore faut-il que or le fait demeure que . R.-L.Wagner (1968), qui note que le «terme de “mot” en est venu assez tard en français à traduire la notion d’une unité lexicale autonome», tout en admettant le bien-fondé de l’analyse qu’A. Martinet fait de la notion de «mot», refuse pourtant d’abandonner ce terme parce que la lexicologie porte sur l’étude des signes en situation. (CAF) The uncovering of such patterns is of great value for language teaching. Just as lexico-grammars (Francis et al. 1996, 1998) have illustrated the close links between word complementation and meaning, so future text grammars may reveal the collocational nature of specific rhetorical moves. In providing a detailed picture of the associations between language func-

< previous page

page_104

next page >

< previous page

page_105

next page >

Page 105 tions and SLDMs, the present study is a first step towards such a view of rhetoric. Apart from the rhetorical relations which will be discussed in Chapter 4, consider the following examples of long-distance collocations. The first set of examples illustrates a particular kind of concessive relationship, where a distinction is made between the results of a superficial vs. a thoroughgoing analysis: On first impression, it might be thought that heredity is a primary cause of disease; but on further consideration it becomes apparent that it is an effect and not a primary cause. (CAE) Grünbaum’s judgment of Freud as a scientist contrasts interestingly with Sulloway’s. On first blush, one might expect Grünbaum and Sulloway to adopt similar positions. After all, both approach Freud from a scientific perspective, Grünbaum as a philosopher of science, Sulloway as a historian of science. But instead they offer radically opposite views of Freud’s scientific credentials. (CAE) At first sight, the approach of Part V appears quite radical, entitling the public to wander freely over upland areas. Upon closer examination. however, it will be seen that it operates negatively rather than positively. (CAE) The second set of examples concerns cases where the author wishes to give a particular subject limited treatment only. In French, the relevant patterns are often introduced by sans+INF; the main clause which follows may start with a topic marker or an exclusion marker realized as an imperative or a verb of the present or future tense groups: Sans nous attarder à discuter de ces questions techniques, bornonsnous à rappeler ici que la face décorée d’un miroir—généralement gravée, quelquefois, on l’a dit, moulée en relief—constitue évidem-ment le revers de l’objet. (CAF) Sans anticiper ici sur l’article étendu que nous consacrerons dans cet ouvrage à la langue sanscrite, nous ferons remarquer que le sanscrit n’est pas, comme on le croit trop généralement la souche des langues indo-européennes; c’est tout au plus une branche collatérale (pour la période védique). (CAF) Sans nous étendre outre mesure sur le chapitre des interprétations ésotériques, nous ajouterons quelques exemples à ceux que nous avons déjà signalés ici ou là. (CAF) Again, the list of such examples could be lengthened. They all illustrate the density and conformity of lexical patterning in text.

< previous page

page_105

next page >

< previous page

page_106

next page >

Page 106 4 Straddling cultures Three types of second-level discourse markers in contrastive perspective I do not expect that my treatment of words, especially difficult words, will strike other people as that which they should have adopted…the most that can be expected is ‘this is not an unreasonable way of exhibiting the facts’. J.A.H.Murray, editor of the first edition of the Oxford English Dictionary The preceding chapter has afforded a bird’s-eye view of different categories of SLDMs. My hope is that the taxonomy presented there has cleared the ground for much future research, as it would clearly be beyond the scope of the present study to describe in high-resolution detail more than a small segment of this vast area. Thus, turning away from the panoramic perspective, we now zoom in on just three major categories. Section 4.1 deals with exemplifiers, Section 4.2 with reformulators and Section 4.3 with inferrers.1 The chapter is rounded off by Section 4.4, which reviews some major themes emerging from the analysis. Each category will receive near-exhaustive treatment in terms of its lexis, based on the evidence from the full-size academic corpora and my manual searches. SLDMs will be subcategorized according to translation equivalence; while all SLDMs belonging to one category are more or less equivalent across languages, those that bear the closest similarities of function will be ascribed to the same (sub)category. The lexical items belonging to each (sub)category appear in tabular form at the beginning of the relevant sections. Where feasible, two types of quantitative data have been incorporated into the relevant tables and the subsequent discussion. 1 A ranking of the relevant SLDMs by frequency of use in the parallel academic corpora (PCAE, PCAF, PCAG). Apart from its obvious linguistic—especially lexicographic—benefits, such a ranking can help guide the design of academic writing courses and materials by providing a rigorous basis for the selection of language items to be taught. Note that the ranking has to be established by a succession of automatic and manual analysis. For example, not all the instances of a

< previous page

page_106

next page >

< previous page

page_107

next page >

Page 107 collocation such as giυe+example serve the pragmatic and/or text-structuring function which is a defining feature of SLDMs. The collocation may also occur in contexts where it serves to report the actions of other authors (e.g. he gives a number of interesting examples); such occurrences have to be discarded manually. 2 A comparison of the overall frequency of each SLDM type across languages using the three parallel corpora (PCAE, PCAF, PCAG). From these data, too, pedagogic benefit may be drawn insofar as they alert materials designers and teachers to the possibility of over-use or under-use of particular SLDMs by authors from particular linguistic backgrounds (see Part II). More importantly, however, these data enable us to determine with relative certainty whether one linguaculture shows a greater partiality for such phrases than another. Such quantitative analysis could have been taken further by comparing frequency of occurrence within particular disciplines such as law, linguistics, philosophy and economics. However, I found in a pre-test that I was unable to build up sub-corpora that were large enough to produce fully reliable results. For example, I selected one million words at random from each of the disciplines just named and then proceeded to search for a set of English exemplifiers containing the imperatives take and consider (see Group 1 on pp. 118–123 for examples); this yielded the results shown in Table 4.1. It should be evident that there are too few instances to warrant definitive judgements on the markers involved; for instance, it would be absurd to claim on the basis of these data that linguists fail to use, or at least under-use such markers. The quantitative analysis is followed by a discussion of the structure and functions of the SLDMs in question. With the most complex categories it seemed wise to follow a stepwise approach proceeding from monolingual analysis to multilingual comparison, thus allowing the reader to form a just understanding of the rationale behind particular equivalences. Where equivalence relations turned out to be more straightforward, discussion will move directly to the multilingual comparison. Before proceeding, two preliminary questions need answering. First, it may be useful to look at previous research on cross-cultural variation in discourse marker use. Second, some clarification is needed concerning the choice of categories. Let us deal with these two issues in sequence. Table 4.1 Frequency of exemplifiers containing take and consider in various sub-corpora Economics Law Linguistics Philosophy 5 4 0 7

< previous page

page_107

next page >

< previous page

page_108

next page >

Page 108 Most cross-cultural studies are silent on the subject of discourse marker use, but a few contain relevant findings. Vinay and Darbelnet (1958:222ff.) were the first to conduct a brief investigation into the use of connectors in English and French, concluding that French, at least in its literary, philosophical, scientific and legal varieties, is particularly fond of these structural markers, and finds it difficult to manage without the additional information they provide about the unfolding of the author’s thought processes. By contrast, English, even in its classical forms, is much less dependent on these explicit connectors and instead relies on the juxtaposition of sentences and text segments, leaving it to the readers to provide for themselves the necessary connections. (Vinay and Darbelnet 1958:222; my translation) Although experienced translators would probably confirm Vinay and Darbelnet’s observations, these lacked the empirical rigour of later studies which introduced frequency counts.2 Thus, Clyne (1987), in a contrastive analysis of English and German sociological and linguistic journal articles, finds a relative paucity of advance organizers in texts by German academics. Since most advance organizers belong to the class of SLDMs, this is highly relevant to the present study. According to Clyne (1987:229), Germans tend to place advance organizers in somewhat obscure locations, ‘almost as if to express embarrassment about this formal adherence to the conventions of an international journal’, whereas English authors place them at or near the beginning of their texts and are thus able to make up for potential non-linearity. Similar considerations apply to definitions, many of which are based on SLDMs. Clyne shows that English academics are more likely than their German colleagues to define technical terms, and also to place their definitions near the start of their texts. The perceived difference may, however, be due to different definitions of the term ‘definition’ itself, as Stolze and Deppert (1998) point out. In the humanities whole books may after all be devoted to defining complex terms such as ‘translation equivalence’. The findings on discourse markers presented in Trumpp (1998) would seem to contradict Clyne (1987). Comparing English, French and German journal articles and reviews in the field of sports science, Trumpp finds that advance organizers are used with equal frequency in the languages under investigation. The picture emerging from Hutz (1997), a microstructural and macrostructural comparison of English- and Germanlanguage articles in the field of social psychology, is a more complex one. In his English corpus he found a higher frequency of metalanguage designed to make text structuring intelligible and to aid text comprehension, whereas the

< previous page

page_108

next page >

< previous page

page_109

next page >

Page 109 German texts were found to contain a larger number of markers of logical relationships (Hutz 1997:173ff. 240–241). In Hutz’s view, this invalidates any claims to the effect that Anglo-American writers assume a higher degree of responsibility for their readers. However, as is evident from his exemplificatory list (Hutz 1997:175), Hutz gives almost exclusive consideration to lexicalized marker words such as thus, therefore, for example, ähnlich, allerdings. Although he briefly mentions Sinhaneti’s (1982) structural classification of discourse devices, which includes SLDMs, there is no indication that he has attempted to compile anything like a representative inventory of these. When he says, for instance, that within the functional category ‘exemplification’ the marker for example accounts for 95 per cent of all occurrences in the Journal of Social Psychology (Hutz 1997:181), it is immediately apparent that he disregards the huge number of SLDMs belonging to this category (see Section 4.1). This is a serious oversight; as mentioned at several points in our discussion, it is perfectly possible to have a single-word lexicalized device in one language where the other language resorts to the use of an SLDM or to other lexical means.3 My suspicion is that Hutz’s failure to take such correspondences into account may have seriously skewed his results on writer responsibility. At a broader level, it seems a moot point whether, as tacitly assumed by Hutz (1997), high frequency of logical markers can serve as a defining feature of writer responsibility in the first place. One counter-argument is the possibility of camouflaging incoherence by means of logical markers (see Blumenthal 1997:122–123). Second, there is the fact that some accomplished British and American writers, such as John D.Gallagher or Peter Grundy, make liberal use of logical and other markers, whereas others, such as Walter Nash, eschew metadiscursive words and phrases altogether. By the same token, English and American style guides differ considerably with regard to the stance taken on metatext (see also Mauranen 1993:168). Even though only psycholinguistic research could provide a definitive answer as to who is right in this debate, such facts encourage the assumption that both types of writing can have clarity and grace as long as certain other conditions obtain.4 For an impressionistic answer, compare the two paragraphs shown in Table 4.2. In the first paragraph, Nash achieves coherence simply by making every sentence depend on the topic sentence and weaving through the piece sets of conceptually related words (e.g. wrong, wrongness, false; equating-equation; policy-politic; incitement-motive; good morals-honesty). In fact, each sentence develops directly from the topic sentence and the whole is rounded off by a concluding sentence which drives home the main point. The second version follows an—arguably—cruder procedure in that it makes enumerative markers do the job of tying the text together. On the whole, it seems fair to say that both versions manage the flow of information with the same clarity of style, though the first has the

< previous page

page_109

next page >

< previous page

page_110

next page >

Page 110 Table 4.2 A comparison of paragraphs with and without metadiscourse Paragraph without metadiscourse Paragraph with metadiscourse There is something wrong with the morality of a There is something wrong about the morality of a saying like saying like ‘Honesty is the best policy’. The ‘Honesty is the best policy’. For one thing, the readiness to weigh wrongness lies in equating virtue with profit. Any virtue in the scale of calculable profit is in itself deplorable. For tolerably observant person must see that the another, there are clearly a great many occasions when being equation is false. There are countless occurrences honest not only fails to bring material reward but may even invite in life when doing what we believe to be right does suffering. Furthermore, if we encourage young people to believe not bring us material rewards. Indeed we may that they will always be materially or socially better off for being sometimes suffer for it. To offer sound policy as an honest, they will discover by experience the falsity of this claim incitement to good morals is therefore in itself and will be inclined to regard us as fools or hypocrites. All in all, dishonest. Honesty, if it requires a motive, must be it seems clear that honesty, if it requires a motive, must be valued for reasons other than politic (Nash valued for reasons other than politic (Nash 1980:13). 1980:12). additional merit of a certain quiet elegance. This goes some way towards demonstrating that the absence of logical markers need not necessarily create difficulties for the reader. It thus appears that opinion among contrastivists is divided as to marker use and its implications for clarity of style. A major shortcoming of studies dealing with these issues (e.g. Hutz 1997) has been found to lie in the neglect of second-level markers. In what follows, an attempt will therefore be made to sharpen the picture emerging from such earlier work. Frequency counts may enable us to provide further empirical evidence for Vinay and Darbelnet’s thesis that French has a pronounced partiality for marker words. Thus, a possible research question concerns the frequencies with which SLDMs are used in each of the languages under survey; an additional research question concerns the variability of marker forms in each language:5 it may well be that one language uses a limited amount of markers with greater frequency than either of the other two, while another uses a larger variety of markers with lower frequency. The question remains as to which categories to choose for closer examination. It is difficult to provide objective reasons for adopting one category for consideration rather than another. In most linguistic studies the preference would be for those items on which dictionaries and prior research are uninformative or misleading. Since SLDMs constitute more or less unexplored territory, however, this criterion would have almost equal applicability to any of the categories identified above. With this in mind, two main factors motivated my choices.

< previous page

page_110

next page >

< previous page

page_111

next page >

Page 111 1 Frequency of items in machine-readable monolingual and multilingual corpora; one of the criterial features of SLDMs identified in Chapter 2 is that they occur less frequently than first-level markers. This means that a comparatively large body of text is needed to arrive at reliable judgements on their syntactic embedding, lexical variability, etc. It has already been noted that no currently available multilingual corpus is large enough to permit sufficient pickings of most SLDMs. Until such corpora become available, it may be wise to focus on SLDMs whose high frequency allows at least some cross-checking of the results obtained from monolingual data against samples of published translations (i.e. bilingual data), a process technically known as ‘triangulation’. Such triangulation will here be employed concerning the class of reformulators (see Section 4.2). 2 Functional relatedness to first-level markers; this criterion enables comparison between first-level markers and SLDMs, with a view to answering such questions as: In what ways do SLDMs serve more specific functions than first-level markers? What does a writer gain by using an SLDM? Such comparison will open up a multitude of new avenues of research to be explored in future studies. Having settled these general issues, we can now move on to the first indepth analysis, which deals with exemplifiers. 4.1 Exemplifiers Exemplifiers are one of the most common, if not the most common, type of SLDM. They occur in any kind of discursive prose and have particular currency in humanities texts. As an object of study, however, exemplification continues to be the poor relation of other rhetorical devices. In Gülich and Kotschi’s (1987) study of reformulation, exemplification appears as a subcategory that is not accorded detailed treatment. Likewise Fuchs (1980:377), while listing a number of discoursal realizations of exemplification, views it as a subcategory of relations of identity; her corpus, composed of church sermons recorded in 1968, leads her to select fairly ephemeral and text-type-specific markers of exemplification, such as c’est in Bienheureux ceux qui pleurent (…) C’est Madeleine après son péché, c’est Monique pleurant son fils Augustin. (Fuchs 1980:377) Such neglect has led to a commonly held view in both the linguistic and the pedagogic literature that exemplification is a minor textual operation, subordinate to major discoursal stratagems such as ‘inferring’ and ‘proving’. As Coltier (1988) and Delcambre (1997) have shown, such a

< previous page

page_111

next page >

< previous page

page_112

next page >

Page 112 view is unjustified. Exemplification merits close investigation for at least three reasons: • it is a complex discoursal operation that has its place in almost any argued text • it is highly frequent in journalistic and academic texts • it poses serious difficulties for L1 and L2 learners To this we may add a fourth reason, namely that previous discussions of exemplification have failed to give due consideration to SLDMs. 4.1.1 Exemplifiers from a rhetorical perspective What exactly is the discoursal status of exemplifiers or exemplification? Questions about the definition of examples have preoccupied philosophers and linguists since Antiquity. Aristotle ( Rhetoric II, 20) viewed examples as one of the two types of oratorical argument (the other being enthymemes ), distinguishing between ‘the mention of actual past facts’ and ‘the invention of facts by the speaker’. Closer to the present day, but in a similar vein, Coltier (1988:24) found that examples serve two functions: supporting abstract knowledge and generating new knowledge. To probe a little deeper, it may be instructive to relate the modern use of the word example to its etymology. It is derived from the Latin verb eximere, ‘to take out’, so that its primary sense seems to be ‘something taken out, a sample, a specimen’ ( Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. example ). Latin rhetoricians coined the noun example to translate Greek paradeigma, which is derived from the verb deiknunai, ‘to show’ (Delcambre 1997:55). It appears that both senses, something taken out and something shown, are still alive in modern English, French and German usage. Dictionary definitions of the word example show clear similarities among these languages and provide significant clues as to the pragmatic-functional role of SLDMs containing the word example . A comparison of the OED, the Grand Robert and the Duden reveals two main senses shared by English, French and German: • ‘a fact, incident, quotation, etc. that illustrates, or forms a particular case of, a general principle, rule, state of things, etc.’ (as in ‘Could you give me an example?’) • ‘a person’s action or conduct regarded as an object of imitation (as in “set a good example”) or a thing regarded as a model’ (as in ‘a fine example of modern architecture’) Intuition tells us that the usual form taken by exemplification in academic texts is best captured in the first definition. If we translate this helpful, but still rather crude definition into RST terms we can tentatively

< previous page

page_112

next page >

< previous page

page_113

next page >

Page 113 infer that exemplifiers are markers which introduce an illustration of a general nucleus by means of a more specific satellite. Stated differently, exemplifiers put in place a paradigmatic relationship between two text spans X and Y, so that X and Y constitute the evocation of a whole and of one of its elements (see also MacNamara 1995:142). In some cases this is evident from lexical relations at the text surface: (1) Yet another difficulty associated with the handling of the cost of government is the fact that the prices at which private sector output is sold covers the taxes the private sector pays. (2) For example, the price of an automobile is higher than it otherwise would be because an automobile assembly plant pays property taxes. The price of an automobile is higher, too, than it otherwise would be because, due to income taxes, assembly line workers’ gross pay is higher than their take-home pay. (CAE; emphases mine) At the broadest level, the relatedness of the nucleus (1) and the satellite (2) is shown by the repetition of the nouns price(s) and taxes . A closer look reveals that these words refer to more general notions in the nucleus than they do in the satellite; the sense relation obtaining between prices at which priυate sector output is sold and the price of an automobile, as well as between taxes the priυate sector pays and property taxes/income taxes, is one of hyponymy, with the meaning of the latter expressions being included in the former. The following sentence provides an even simpler illustration of exemplification based on hyponymy: New tools often have more than one use; for example, lasers are an indispensable medical tool, and they also have applications as a military weapon. (CAE) In some cases, however, there are no such lexical cues marking exemplification. This shows that exemplification is a cognitive as well as a discursive operation, allowing writers to make—and readers to perceive—connections between nuclei and satellites which are not lexically marked in an overt manner. The following examples indicate how the notion of exemplification may only be tacitly present, so that one may talk of a ‘zero connector’: Daughters without Japanese names talked about how they wanted to have them and how they made sure that their children would. D20 reported: When we got older and we met our friends that were hapa [half Japanese, half white], they’d have Japanese middle names. We’d go ‘Why didn’t you give us one of those too?’ We were really wanting one. Me and my sister really wanted a Japanese or a middle Japanese name. (CAE)

< previous page

page_113

next page >

< previous page

page_114

next page >

Page 114 The anthology as a whole should be approached in part in terms of the general themes that emerge from comparing and contrasting the individual selections. Let me mention two: First, there is much to be gained through a comparative understanding of our own (U.S.) artworld and why it is as it is. When we read of the difficulty Eastern European artists have had converting to a late capitalist system, we recognize their consequent ennui and irrelevance as similar to what has been going on in our own arts in recent decades. (CAE) De fait, notre histoire ne se compose pas uniquement de déchirements conflictuels. A côté des guerres civiles, larvées ou déclarées, qui ont dressé l’une contre l’autre deux moitiés de la France, elle a aussi connu des moments, fugitifs, d’unanimité où un peuple entier goûtait la douceur de la concorde et aspirait a la pérenniser: la Fête de la Fédération fut l’un de ces moments où l’on crut la Revolution achevée et accomplie…(CAF) Such examples are, however, extremely rare, and even here it might be argued that there are lexical or other cues marking the exemplificatory process. In the first excerpt D20 might be viewed as a hyperonym of daughter; in the second, the enumerator let me mention two may also be considered an exemplifier; in the third, a punctuation mark, namely the colon, introduces the example. Such borderline cases are probably what leads Delcambre (1997:83) to draw the erroneous conclusion that ‘in the absence of other forms of substitution, the use of a specialized marker [i.e. an exemplifier, D.S.] is necessary’, although two pages earlier she herself cites a counter-example. A closer inspection of the examples discussed so far, which account for the majority of cases, suggests that the general-particular, or paradigmatic, relation posited above can be described in terms of two RST relations which sometimes overlap—namely, ‘restatement’ and ‘elaboration’ (see Table 4.3). Restatement is a self-explanatory relation; it is subject to the constraint that S and N should be ‘of comparable bulk’. The elaborative relation is somewhat more complex, realizing a link between nucleus and satellites in one or more of the following ways: (1) set—member, (2) abstract—instance, (3) whole—part, (4) process—step, (5) object— attribute, (6) generalization—specific (Mann and Thompson 1988:273). Exemplifiers Table 4.3 The RST relations ‘restatement’ and ‘elaboration’ Relation name Nucleus Satellite Restatement a situation a re-expression of the situation Elaboration basic information additional information

< previous page

page_114

next page >

< previous page

page_115

next page >

Page 115 Table 4.4 The RST relation ‘background’ Relation name Nucleus Satellite Background text whose understanding is being facilitated text for facilitating understanding can thus be defined as construing the subsequent discourse (the nucleus) as an elaboration of the preceding discourse (the satellite). Note that they usually do so by retrospection; Roulet et al. (1991) call this retrospective construction of X as the background to Y ‘rétro-interprétation’. Note further that, as the wording of the last sentence suggests, we could also interpret this relation as ‘background’, but we would then have a breach of what Mann and Thompson consider the canonical order of the background relation (see Table 4.4). The order required by the background relation is possible in exemplification, but comparatively rare, so that it makes more sense to see ‘elaboration’ rather than ‘background’ as the primary relation obtaining between previous and ensuing discourse. Further support for this view comes from the fact that instances of the non-canonical order may be explained in terms of a third type of RST relation; witness the following example from the beginning of a book chapter: A la fin des années soixante, un universitaire, professeur de mathématiques, avait fondé un institut de recherches sur l’enseignement, où s’élaboraient ce qu’on appela les mathématiques nouvelles. Un jour, devant ses collègues, il posa cette question: ‘Peut-on démontrer que notre réforme rendra l’enseignement plus efficace?’ Question honnête, mais naïve. Car enfin, l’efficacité d’un enseignement mathématique ne se démontre pas de façon mathématique! C’est une question qui n’est pas vraiment claire—que veut dire ‘efficace’?—et dont la réponse ne peut avoir l’évidence d’une loi scientifique. Ce qui ne signifie pas que la question n’ait pas de réponse du tout. Si l’absence de demonstration signifiait le nonsavoir, il n’y aurait pas de sciences humaines. Or, elles existent, ces sciences; mais les connaissances qu’elles procurent sont d’un autre ordre que celles des sciences ‘dures’. Cela pour illustrer la thèse de ce chapitre, et de tout le livre: entre la demonstration scientifique ou logique et l’ignorance pure et simple, il existe tout un domaine qui est celui de l’argumentation. (CAF) In using the wording cela pour illustrer la thèse, the author makes explicit the exemplificatory nature of the introduction and the fact that he uses it to support the main thesis underlying his book. The exemplifier is the

< previous page

page_115

next page >

< previous page

page_116

next page >

Page 116 only explicit marker of exemplification in this case; there is no other lexical material suggesting an exemplificatory relation. The same applies to the following excerpt, where a legal case is mentioned to exemplify, or rather to suggest, the validity of a general thesis: The doctrine of mitigation of damages is consistent with that policy. For example, in Ostrowski v. Azzara, a diabetic plaintiff had a sore toe that her podiatrist treated by removing an ingrown toenail. The plaintiff subsequently alleged that the removal was ill-advised and unnecessary. The site did not heal and later required multiple surgical interventions because of vascular problems. One issue considered on appeal was whether the plaintiff s post-removal health habits could be considered under a mitigation theory. (CAE) Here too the example functions not only as a specification but also as an argument in support of a thesis. Notice in passing how this links up with the aforementioned Aristotelian definition of examples as oratorical arguments. In RST terms, then, the two examples just cited illustrate an ‘evidence relation’, whereby the satellite provides information intended to increase the reader’s belief in a claim made in the nucleus. The constraint on the nucleus here is that the reader might not believe the nucleus to a degree satisfactory to the writer, whereas the constraint on the satellite is that the reader will believe it or find it credible (Mann and Thompson 1988:251–252; see Table 4.5). Although exemplifiers can have scope over vastly differing amounts of the preceding or subsequent discourse, they usually link elements or sequences rather than text segments. Consider the following two examples, in which the exemplificatory text span covers two sentences and four paragraphs respectively (the second example has been abridged). Nevertheless the exemplificatory passage may in both cases be described as a rhetorical element: Moreover, according to Professor Sugarman, who has documented the status of private American insurance coverage, approximately two-thirds of working Americans are covered by formal private employee benefit plans that provide for income replacement upon disability, and about eighty-five percent of all Americans are covered by adequate medical insurance. The state of Florida provides a typical Table 4.5 The RST relation ‘evidence’ Relation name Nucleus Satellite Evidence a claim information intended to increase the reader’s belief in the claim

< previous page

page_116

next page >

< previous page

page_117

next page >

Page 117 example. In 1980, nine out of ten Floridians had medical insurance, which covered more than eighty-eight percent of their medical expenses incident to an accident. (CAE) It is difficult to even know how to think about, let alone measure, the relationship between low-skill immigrants and the unemployment of low-skill natives. Consider, for example, the following not atypical news story about the difficulty that employers have in recruiting low-skill workers: Help Wanted: Burger Flippers, Teens Preferred Berlin, N.J.—Betty Hagen stands out among the employees at the Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant here, not because her uniform is usually covered in biscuit flour, but because the hair tucked under her cap is gray. While nearly all her colleagues are teenagers, Mrs. Hagen is a 60-year-old grandmother. […] If the flow of low-skill immigrants is sufficiently great that employers do not actively recruit young people and retired persons, should that be counted as employment harm to natives?…(CAE) From this we may note two other facts about exemplification. First, exemplifiers can also be used as citational devices (cf. also an example:…, zur Illustration des Gesagten einige Beispiele:). Second, they may introduce an amplification or a condensation of the preceding discourse (see Delcambre 1997:81). Amplification is more frequent, as should be evident from the examples just cited; condensation can be seen in the following instance: This, together with the entrance of new companies (for example, Samsung), is expected to push milling capacity to over 10 million tonnes. (CAE) Exemplificatory passages can take various discoursal forms. Delcambre (1997) distinguishes two: lists on the one hand and cases or anecdotes on the other. My own observations suggest that a further subdivision of the latter category is necessary, giving us a tripartite classification: (1) cases or instances, (2) case studies and other narrative texts (newspaper articles, anecdotes, etc.), (3) lists. Examples of type (1) and (2) can be seen respectively in the pre-penultimate and penultimate examples. The following stretch of text provides another illustration of the use of examples as anecdotal evidence (i.e. a subtype of type 2): The appropriate response to someone who causes us to suffer—and here, of course, I am not referring to those instances in which others

< previous page

page_117

next page >

< previous page

page_118

next page >

Page 118 oppose us legitimately, as when, for example, they refuse to give in to our unreasonable demands—is to recognize that they will ultimately lose their peace of mind, their inner balance and thereby destroy their happiness by harming us. We do best if we have compassion for them, especially since a simple wish to see them hurt cannot actually harm them. It will certainly harm us, though. Here, imagine two neighbours in dispute. One of them is able to take this dispute lightly. The other is obsessed with it and constantly schemes to find a way to hurt his or her opponent…(CAE) Lastly, here is an example of type (3): The trend toward shared lines of inquiry in various human sciences—history, sociology, psychology, anthropology, and rhetoric, to name but a few—is of course controversial, but many scholars welcome such a shift. (CAE) 4.1.2 Types of exemplifiers All three languages under survey offer abundant resources for the purpose of exemplification, which fall into six major subcategories of translation equivalents. Interlingual correspondences between these are easy to detect and, by contrast with some other categories of SLDMs, do not need to be discussed in a separate section. Group 1: Imperatiυes, hortatiυes and functionally equiυalent constructions Group 1 (see Tables 4.6 and 4.7) comprises exemplifiers that serve actively to engage the reader in the author’s train of thought. Grammatically speaking, most of these items are imperatives and hortatives. While traditional grammar holds that imperatives serve to express commands, requests, exhortations and the like, their illocutionary force in academic writing is normally felt to be that of an invitation rather than an injunction to the reader (see Huddleston 1971). However, as elicitation data (Swales et al. 1998) indicáte, some English writers feel that that an imperative of the type VP~implies command and therefore refrain from using such imperatives. Besides helping the author to exercise varying degrees of power over the reader, imperatives also contribute to ‘clausal and sentential economies’ (Swales et al. 1998:110). Urged by journal editors to shorten the length of their original articles, academic writers may, for example, prefer the succinct interlocutory take (, for example) to the more elaborate sentence-integrated marker a good example is proυided by. Lastly, the use of imperatives may be motivated by a tendency shown by academics from

< previous page

page_118

next page >

< previous page

page_119

next page >

Page 119 Table 4.6 Rank ordering of imperatives, hortatives and functionally equivalent constructions (occurrences in PCAE, PCAF and PCAG respectively) English French German (for example/for instance) voir, par exemple, (102) siehe z.B. NP (23) see (for example/for instance) NP voyez (, par exemple) (3) (200) considérez, par exemple (1) (for example) consider (for example) prenez (, par exemple) (1) NP (54) On prendra l’exemple (0) take, for (another) example, NP (16) regardez, par exemple (0) tenez, par exemple: (0) Consider a(n) (ADJ) example /instance. (7) take the example of (as examples of NP) (5) consider (as an example) NP(3) take, as an example, NP (1) as an illustration (of this)/by way of (brief) illustration, consider NP (2) Take (even) NP (2) see as an example of NP (0) Let us (now) take+(as)+ Prenons+exemple (object noun) Betrachten wir+ Beispiel (e) ( object noun) DET+ADJ+example(s) (4) (40) (17) Let us consider+DET+ADJ citons par/en/à titre d’exemple Nehmen wir+Beispiel(e) (object noun) (8) +example(s) (4) (13) Nehmen wir als (weiteres) Beispiel/zum Let me give (you) (but) one example Donnons+exemple (object noun) Beispiel/ beispielsweise (etc.) (6) (2) (7) Nehmen wir NP (1) Let me offer+DET (+ADJ +) example Prenons par/pour/ comme/à titre Greifen wir (Beispiel, object noun ) heraus (1) d’(autre) exemple+NP (5) (1) Let us consider, for the sake of considérons comme/ pour/par Wählen wir ein Beispiel. (1) illustration, NP (1) exemple NP (5) Wählen wir als Beispiel NP(1) Let just one further example suffice. citons+exemple (object noun) Illustrieren/Erläutern (etc.) wir dies (0) (3) an/anhand /etc.+DET (+ADJ)+ Beispiel (1) Let us look at some examples. (0) pensons, par exemple, à NP (2) Vergegenwärtigen wir uns Let us take an illustration. (0) Prenons NP (1) voyons+exemple (object noun) (1) Reprenons l’exemple de NP (4) dies an+DET (+ADJ)+ Beispiel (0) nous prenons comme exemple Verdeutlichen wir uns mit Hilfe+DET (2) (+ADJ)+ Beispiel (0) Songeons à+exemple (1) Nous prendrons+exemple (1)

< previous page

page_119

next page >

< previous page

page_120

next page >

Page 120 English

French German Considérons+exemple (object noun) (0) Prenons comme illustration NP(0) Nous reprendrons ici un exemple de X. (0) Nous citerons de nouveau quelques exemples. (0) Proposons quelques exemples. (0) Jugeons-en par quelques exemples. (0) Soit, par exemple, (5) Soit les deux phrases: (4) Table 4.7 Total number of occurrences of exemplifiers of type 1 excluding see, for example,/voir, par exemple/siehe z.B. English 302 102 French 221 119 German 58 35 almost any disciplinary background to imitate the conciseness of mathematical discourse (Swales et al. 1998:111). This is plainly the case with French soit, used for introducing a hypothesis or supposition in mathematical discourse: Soit un triangle équilatéral A, B, C. English authors have a large range of exemplificatory imperatives at their disposal, using the direct second-person imperative VP~as well as the less imposing hortative let us+VP and the inclusive let me+VP. Of these last two, the former is around five times more frequent than the latter, showing a high degree of audience sensitivity among authors. By contrast, French authors show much greater reliance on the hortative; the second-person imperative is extremely rare in French scholarly writing, and not much commoner in journalism. An example: L’ensemble est sans doute inégal, et la chasse au ‘hic’ est d’autant plus gratifiante que ce qui cloche est plus dissimulé ou subtil. Voyez, par exemple, cet autre jardinier taillant la haie du château. (NF)

< previous page

page_120

next page >

< previous page

page_121

next page >

Page 121 German writers eschew second-person imperatives altogether, with the exception of siehe, which may be viewed as a halfway house between an exemplifier and a confirmer (this is not to be confused with the exemplifier siehe z.B. ); it is almost exclusively attested in journalistic discourse: Immer wackeln irgendwelche Stars. Siehe Sergei Bubkas vierter Platz im Stabhochsprung mit 5,70m. Oder der dritte Rang der 35 Jahre alten Merlene Ottey aus Jamaica. (NG) The reason for the absence of other second-person imperatives in German may be that these are felt to be too impolite or too colloquial. Instead, German sometimes resorts to the set phrase man denke an, a use paralleled in French by que l’on pense à (i.e. the subjunctive) and on prendra l’exemple (i.e. the future tense). There are no other structural divergences to be noted, except perhaps for the fact that in English the pattern take/consider, for example, +NP is significantly more frequent than take/consider the example of +NP. Of four occurrences of take the example of +NP in CAE, three were found in the same text. This is in keeping with what will be said below on exemplificatory infinitive clauses. Within the patterns for this group there are differing degrees of lexical variation. In English only the verbs consider and take are normally used as direct second-person imperatives. These are usually combined with the phrase for example, but may also occur on their own. This is matched in French by considérons and prenons and in German by betrachten wir and nehmen wir . There is, however, a greater degree of stylistic liberty in French and German, permitting the use of at least two other verbs ( donner and oser) in French and five other verbs in German (illustrieren, herausgreifen, υerdeutlichen, υergegenwärtigen, wählen). While the French imperatives made from υoir and saυoir have been in use for several centuries, those based on other verbs may well have arisen through interference with English, for they appear to be more common in Canadian French: Le kiosquier est une des innombrables facettes de Paris, Rubik’s cube géant dont personne n’a vraiment la clé. Pas même les Parisiens de souche. Prenez les bistrots. Pour vous, étranger, ils ne sont certes pas interchangeables. (Robitaille 1995:23) The idea of invitation contained in imperatives and hortatives may also be conveyed by other means. In English and French this role is sometimes performed by an ‘inclusive’ first-person plural pronoun or an impersonal third-person singular pronoun. These are usually combined with one of the verbs already seen above. In French and German it is also possible to

< previous page

page_121

next page >

< previous page

page_122

next page >

Page 122 resort to the subjunctive mood to express invitation or command. This gives us exemplifiers such as que l’on pense à or als Beispiel sei…genannt, which, although structurally different, will be included in the present subcategory by virtue of their semantic-pragmatic similarity; the same holds true for exemplifiers of the type we would cite/je citerai/ich denke dabei an, which have also been taken account of (see Table 4.8). The frequency data illustrate a principle familiar from other areas of corpus-driven lexicography: just as the commonest meanings of words have been shown to be many times more frequent than their next commonest meanings (Sinclair 1991), so too some standard realizations of SLDMs have a far higher likelihood of occurrence than other items. Thus, let us consider/take+example account for more than half the total tokens of hortatives in (P)CAE, and prenons+exemple outnumbers all other items in (P)CAF by a wide margin. There is also some evidence of a correlation between length of SLDM types and frequency of occurrence. Minimal three-word SLDMs such as take, for example or soit, par exemple, rank the highest. Conversely, lengthy word groupings such as as an illustration of this, consider are much less used. From the available evidence, it would seem that in all three languages under investigation the exemplifiers of this group exhibit a relatively even distribution across genres and individual texts, thus turning out to be stylistically neutral. The frequency counts also show that exemplifiers of this type are unevenly distributed across languages. While the divergence between Table 4.8 Rank ordering of exemplifiers that are functionally equivalent to type 1 exemplifiers English total: 0 French total: 40 German total: 30 (by way of illustration) on pourrait citer à cet égard (4) als Beispiel sei NP genannt/ zitiert/angeführt I/we would cite NP (0) je citerai ainsi à titre d’exemple NP (16) (etc.)//ist zu nennen (etc.); NP mag als Que l’on pense/songe (par exemple) à Beispiel…gelten/dienen (14): als Beispiel sei hier NP/ à ce que (etc.) (11) der Preis für qu’il suffise de penser à Weizen durchschnittlicher /citer/mentionner/ remarquer/signaler Qualität genannt (etc.) als Beispiel mag die Antwort dienen, die Papst Nous pensons, par exemple, à (5) Pius… nous donnons+exemple (object noun) Man denke an NP (13) (1) Hier wäre…zu nennen/zu erwähnen (3) nous donnons comme /pour/à titre d’exemple (2) nous retenons comme exemple (1)

< previous page

page_122

next page >

< previous page

page_123

next page >

Page 123 English and French is relatively insignificant in the parallel corpus (especially if one excludes see, for example, and its literal equivalents from the count), the gap between English and French on one side, and German on the other, is all the wider. The exemplifiers in question occur three to four times more frequently in English and French than in German. Some differences are particularly striking. For example, the dense use of see, for example in the English corpus (200 occurrences) contrasts with the comparatively infrequent occurrence of its direct German equivalent (23 occurrences) siehe z.B., a divergence that can be explained by the German preference for using siehe on its own. It is also worth noting that French offers a wider variety of stylistic variants than either English or German, although some of these are so rare that they cannot be located in PCAF (e.g. proposons quelques exemples, jugeons-en par quelques exemples). Group 2: Noun phrases with the head example6 Most of the items in this group (see Tables 4.9 and 4.10) are bare noun phrases (An example:) or noun phrases consisting of a noun plus a determiner (some examples) or a short periphrastic genitive (exemple d’antithèse). Table 4.9 Rank ordering of noun phrases with the head example (occurrences in PCAE, PCAF and PCAG respectively) English French German For example: (41) (ainsi/comme) par exemple:a (71) Beispiel(e): (73) Here is an example/here are some Exemple (ADJ/de+N): (70) Hier/hierzu/hierfür/dazu (nur)+Beispiel examples (of+NP): (40) (object noun) (22) Example: (12) (en) voici+exemple(s) (object Zum Beispiel/z.B.: (51) Some (ADJ) examples: (6) noun) (49) Zwei (etc.) Beispiele (aus/von vielen) (1) Examples are:/Obvious examples are: (5)voici par exemple NP (9) Autre exemple (+de NP): (7) (wie) beispielsweise: (1) A(n) (ADJ) example (therefore): (4) Einige Beispiele: (1) Autres exemples, parmi tant Weitere Beispiele: (1) Further examples/other examples: (0) d’autres: (1) Es folgen einige Beispiele. (0) Un exemple? (0) Examples abound: (0) Faut-il un exemple? (0) Ein/Unser zweites (etc.) Some illustrations follow. (0) Premier exemple: (0) Beispiel: (0) Deux exemples: (0) Zweites (etc.) Beispiel: (0) Among the better examples are: (0) Deuxième/Second exemple: (0) (ADJ) Beispiel (e.g. bestes Beispiel ): (0) Les exemples abondent/pullulent/ (ADJ) example: (0) fourmillent: (0) Another example: (0) As an example (0) Exemple d’antithèse, NP (0) Note a In French typography the deux-points (also: double point ), or colon, is usually set off by an unbreakable space on either side. This feature has, of course, been taken account of.

< previous page

page_123

next page >

< previous page

page_124

next page >

Page 124 Table 4.10 Frequency of occurrence of type 2 exemplifiers English French German 108 207 150 All of them centre on the noun example itself. It is reasonable to assume that readers will consider these SLDMs to be less imposing and less forceful than those assembled in Group 1. Clearly, they also make for even greater parsimony and clarity of style. Often highlighted through appropriate punctuation, they serve as chunking devices which help the reader to anticipate that the subsequent discourse is of the order of exemplification. Structurally speaking, the cross-linguistic picture is almost perfectly symmetrical here. What little assymmetry there is, such as the occurrence of the pronominal adverbs hierfür and dazu in German or the use of supplementive clauses in French (exemple d’antithèse, la fin de X…), can be explained in terms of general interlingual differences. Another significant difference is to be found in punctuation: where English and German authors invariably follow the bare noun phrase (an) example with a full stop or a colon, French authors may also resort to the question mark ([Faut-il] un exemple?) . Even as far as punctuation is concerned, then, French seems to allow greater variation. The frequency counts seem to suggest that French authors display a much stronger stylistic preference for these exemplifiers than do their English or German counterparts. They are also inclined to use a broader range of devices than German authors: modified and non-modified noun phrases, supplementive clauses, interrogative clauses, staging by means of υoici, etc. In PCAG we find a clear preponderance of the non-modified noun phrase followed by a colon. Zum Beispiel, at a mere nine attestations in PCAG, is also much less common than its literal English and French equivalents; this is due to a preference for the abridged form in German. It is also noteworthy that French has at its disposal three different items to emphasize the abundance of exemplificatory material, namely les exemples abondent/pullulent/fourmiller where English must content itself with examples abound (or: there is an abundance of examples). Group 3: Exemplificatory infinitiυe clauses This group, probably because it is situated towards the freer end of the phraseological cline, does not present as unified a picture as Groups 1 and 2 (see Table 4.11). A systematic sweep through the academic corpora indicates that English exemplificatory infinitive clauses do not normally contain the noun example preceded by the definite article and followed by a periphrastic genitive (e.g. the example of newspapers), a pattern which is

< previous page

page_124

next page >

< previous page

page_125

next page >

Page 125 Table 4.11 Rank ordering of exemplificatory infinitive clauses (occurrences in PCAE, PCAF and PCAG respectively) English total: 74 French total: 91 German total: 38 1take+example: 1prendre+exemple: 1Beispiel+nennen (12): to take but one example pour ne prendre que cet exemple um nur ein Beispiel zu nennen to take an extended pour prendre un exemple um ein weiteres Beispiel zu nennen (etc.) example plus contemporain 2Beispiel+bleiben bei (4): to take two random pour prendre un autre exemple chez um bei diesem Beispiel zu bleiben: examples les insectes um im Beispiel zu bleiben to take a common example pour ne prendre que ces exemples of NP (etc.) (38) pour prendre un autre exemple 2give+example: connu 3Beispiel+aufnehmen (2): (just) to give (you) an pour prendre un exemple adjectival um das oben zitierte example (29) Beispiel noch einmal aufzunehmen to give a few examples 2reprendre+exemple: 4Beispiel + to give two examples pour reprendre l’exemple de (NP) vorwegnehmen/wählen/zurückkommen to give an example from pour reprendre les exemples cités auf/benennen/deutlich machen (5): television (etc.) (14) (12) um ein späteres Beispiel vorwegzunehmen 3cite+example: 3citer+exemple: um wieder auf unser Beispiel+NP to cite another example pour ne citer que l’exemple de (NP) zurückzukommen to cite one example among pour ne citer qu’un exemple um ein Beispiel aus dem Bereich der Sprache zu many (6) pour ne citer que trois exemples wählen 4name/mention+example: pour citer un autre exemple (9) um ein aktuelles Beispiel zu benennen to name but two examples to mention a not atypical example (2) 5to pick just one example to use my earlier example to paint an extreme example (etc.) (1) 4donner+exemple: pour ne donner que quelques 5Beispiel+geben/aufführen/ exemples anführen/aufgreifen/vorführen/einbringen/ pour donner un exemple (6) aufnehmen/ergänzen (0): 5rester+exemple: um ein Beispiel zu geben pour rester sur l’exemple …(2) Um nur ein Beispiel in diesen komplizierten 6retenir+exemple: Zusammenhängen zu erwähnen pour ne retenir qu’un exemple (1) um ein kleines Beispiel aufzuführen 7pour puiser dans notre histoire un exemple élémentaire (0) to illustrate zur Veranschaulichung/ to illustrate this (point) (etc.) pour illustrer mon Illustration/Verdeutlichung to illustrate by example propos/ceci/cela/ces [sei hier eine fehlerhafte Übersetzung angeführt] to illustrate with a simple remarques/ce qui précède (etc.) (32) (11) example um dies zu demonstrieren/ to demonstrate this 13 veranschaulichen/illustrieren /verdeutlichen (etc.) (4)

< previous page

page_125

next page >

< previous page

page_126

next page >

Page 126 commonly found in their French and German counterparts. This means that, somewhat contrary to intuition, a literal rendering of such German infinitive clauses as um nur das Beispiel der FAZ zu nennen by (?)to take/giυe/use only the example of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung would be rather unidiomatic, even though one does find instances of to take the case of the (+noun). In English, the actual example, in this case the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, is usually the subject of the main clause rather than the object of the infinitive clause. In a parallel fashion, if one wished to translate into French the German infinitive clause um auf einige möglichst υerschiedene Beispiele wie…zu υerweisen two translation shifts would be necessary. First, one would have to use a different verb to the literal equivalent renυoyer because French exemplifying infinitive clauses typically contain the verbs prendre and citer, or less often, donner, reprendre and retenir. Second, the examples, introduced by the conjunction wie in the German infinitive clause, would have to be positioned in the main clause of the French target sentence. It goes without saying that such subtle interlingual divergences among subgroups of SLDMs are a potential minefield for language learners and translators. Apart from the structural dissimiliarities just discussed, there are also semantic-pragmatic differences between the languages under survey. One of the most obvious is that German exemplificatory infinitive clauses, by virtue of their greater syntactic extendibility and inherent lexical variety, can express many more shades of meaning than their English or French counterparts. This is evident, first and foremost, from the fairly large array of different verbs to be found in German, many of which are not attested in PCAG, but in CAG and NG. As English and French content themselves with five major verb choices respectively (take, give, cite, pick, use, mention; prendre, reprendre, donner, retenir, rester [sur]), an interesting translation principle must be posited here which has not yet been noted in the literature. Consider, as an example, the German exemplificatory infinitive clause um ein Beispiel υorzuführen, which carries clear overtones of scientific demonstration. Although the collocation to demonstrate s.th. with an example is available in English, the exemplificatory infinitive clause to demonstrate this with an example would seem to run counter to the norms of English academic prose, so that the experienced translator is likely to fall back on one of the standard infinitive clauses introduced by to-infinitiυe+take/giυe/cite/use. What we have here, then, is a clear case of what might be called ‘structurally bound collocation’. If, on the basis of this insight, we wished to set up a translation principle, this would stipulate that, other factors being equal, the translator must check the compatibility of collocational equivalents with particular linguistic environments. Here, then, we find another case where corpus evidence and native-speaker intuition may find themselves at odds. If asked whether a clause such as to demonstrate this with an example is conceivable in academic writing, most native speakers would probably answer in the affirmative;

< previous page

page_126

next page >

< previous page

page_127

next page >

Page 127 only very experienced and style-conscious writers would query the naturalness of such a wording. This principle also applies to cases where long German noun groups are embedded within the exemplificatory infinitive clause, so that literal renderings would inflate the English infinitive clause to an unacceptable size. This is conveniently illustrated in Table 4.12. A further browsing of the corpus revealed that the three languages under survey resemble each other with regard to the embedding of exemplificatory infinitive clauses within the sentence. Although their position is variable, there is a strong preference in all three languages for sentence-initial position. A deviant type of infinitive clause is to illustrate, occurring as it does without any object; German has no structural equivalent for this, and French writers hardly ever use pour illustrer without an object: One reason that harvests were large despite the droughts is people’s increased capacity to overcome adverse natural conditions. To illustrate, one of the most publicized droughts was in southern California …(CAE) At about 88 occurrences per 10 million words French markers of Group 3 are slightly more frequent than their English equivalents, and more than twice as frequent as their German equivalents. Hence German exemplificatory infinitive clauses are simultaneously less commonly observed and more variable than their French counterparts, revealing a German tendency to ad hoc formulation as opposed to English and French reliance on collocations. A similar tendency was already noted, with reference mainly to the spoken language, by House (1997). The frequency data also provide a convenient illustration of the link between likelihood of occurrence and acceptability. In English and Table 4.12 Translating lengthy German exemplificatory infinitive clauses German original English translation Warum sollen die Würzburger oder die Regensburger nicht (wie die Another good example is afforded by Bürgerinnen und Bürger im baden-württembergischen Ulm), darüber one of Germany’s neighbours: If it abstimmen dürfen, ob sie einen größeren Straßentunnel wollen? Oder, um ein weren’t for local referendums, Zurich Beispiel aus dem benachbarten Ausland zu wählen: Zürich hätte keine wouldn’t have a tram that experts Straßenbahn, zu der Experten aus der ganzen Welt pilgern, gäbe es dort from all over the world flock to visit. nicht einen Bürgerentscheid. (NG) (my translation)

< previous page

page_127

next page >

< previous page

page_128

next page >

Page 128 French there is a scale of acceptability, with stock collocations such as take+example clearly established at the upper end and low-probability combinations such as paint+example at the bottom. Spaced out in between are moderately frequent groupings such as name+example. There is noticeable complementarity here between English and French usage, but German is clearly the odd man out. Many of the English and French collo cations at the lower end of the scale (e.g. paint+example), while going unnoticed in connected text, may well be judged unacceptable if presented out of context. Not so in German, where lower-end collocations are many and varied. The rarity of lower-end collocations in English and French may be explained in terms of very high or very low degrees of language awareness on the part of writers: just as accomplished stylists may wish to use the occasional ‘creative’ collocation, so budding writers with little experience of academic or journalistic prose may produce collocational infelicities. A clear example of a stylistically elegant coinage is pour puiser dans notre histoire un exemple élémentaire . By way of contrast, to paint an extreme example is, to say the least, a shade odd. This implies that ‘deviance’ or ‘error’ are less to do with fuzziness in grammar, as many older accounts suggest (e.g. Legenhausen 1989), than simply with likelihood of occurrence. It also implies that German, where lower-end groupings form a fairly large category, is more tolerant of deviance or, to put it more favourably, more creative than English and French. Group 4:Clauses built around verbs denoting ‘illustration’ or ‘demonstration’ This group (see Table 4.13) covers sentence-fragment exemplifiers whose common denominator is that they are all based on clauses containing a verb denoting ‘demonstration’ or ‘illustration’; in most cases, these verbs enter into strong collocations with the nouns example, exemple and Beispiel Also noteworthy is the fact that there is a clearly discernible cline among the languages under study, with English showing the least, and German the most, lexicogrammatical variation. In English there are two basic sentence patterns to be found, one impersonal, the other personal. 1 In the first pattern, a noun phrase with the noun example as its head occupies subject position; it is followed by a verb such as illustrate and an object noun phrase such as this, what is meant or these points. The verbal auxiliaries can, will and may, or their substitutes serve to and help (to), frequently supplement the verb phrase, but in current English use of the modal may is restricted to the passive voice. Note also that prepositional usage varies from one verb to another, and even with the same verb: illustrate+with (or: from)+example, clarify+by (+example). 2 In the second pattern, I and we occur as subjects, followed by a verb

< previous page

page_128

next page >

< previous page

page_129

next page >

Page 129 Table 4.13 Rank ordering of clauses built around verbs denoting ‘illustration’ or ‘demonstration’ (occurrences in PCAE, PCAF and PCAG respectively; exemplifiers introduced by the conjunctions as/comme/wie [comme le montre l’exemple suiυant] were not taken account of here) English total: 93 French total: 91 German total: 75 1…is/may be/can be 1exemple (subject noun) + illustrer (36) 1Beispiel+verdeutlichen (ADV) illustrated/I can Un exemple simple illustrera l’importance… (28): Eine Skizze soll dies illustrate…(41): deux exemples en guise d’illustration: am Beispiel der This can be simply 2exemple (subject noun)+ montrer (30): un exemple le Entstehung von illustrated from the montre:… un exemple permet de montrer… Philosophie verdeutlichen. writing of business Am Beispiel verdeutlicht: letters. … This may be illustrated 2Beispiel+illustrieren (12): with the verb… Ein Beispiel mag dies This is nicely illustrated illustrieren. by 2example(s)+illustrate 3illustrer (10): on peut/nous pouvons illustrer NP par NP 3Beispiel+erläutern (12): (38): Dies soll am Beispiel von A brief example will Kollokationen erläutert serve to illustrate this. werden. …may be illustrated by 4exemple+à partir de/à travers/sur (etc.) 4Beispiel+zeigen (10): das just a few examples (prepositional object)+ montrer/mettre en évidence/illustrer/ folgende Beispiel zeigt… 3example+demonstrate démontrer/etc. (9): 5Beispiel+veranschaulichen (5): Mettons cette opposition en evidence a partir d’un exemple (8): Ein simples Beispiel The following example c’est a travers trois exemples qu’on peut poser… soll veranschaulichen, demonstrates that… Sur un exemple d’article cité par…, nous montrons worum es geht. 4example(s)+suffice (5): Two examples will suffice. 5example+clarify (2): 6Beispiel+dienen (3): Some examples may Als Beispiel soll uns… serve to clarify these dienen. points. Als prominentestes 6example(s)+indicate (1): Beispiel dient hier… a simplified example will 7illustrieren/verdeutlichen indicate (NP) (etc.) (+beispielhaft) (2): 7example+make clear/ 5exemple+manifester/ éclairer/mettre en Illustriert wird das plain (1): An example or lumière/mesurer/apporter des éclairages sur (etc.) (often in beispielhaft durch two should make clear conjunction with permettre) (3): cet exemple met en folgenden Ausschnitt. these all-important lumière… D’autres exemples vont nous permettre de mieux Einige Zahlen sollen das distinctions. mesurer encore la distance qui sépare… beispielhaft verdeutlichen. 8example+illuminate (0): 8Beispiel+beleuchten/ A numerical example belegen/deutlich machen/ helps illuminate the werden (0) issue. 6exemple+indiquer (3): Ces quelques exemples indiquent que…

< previous page

page_129

next page >

< previous page

page_130

next page >

Page 130 such as clarify, demonstrate or illustrate and a prepositional object usually containing the noun example . Overall, there are six English verbs and one verb-adjective collocation commonly found with these patterns: show, illustrate, indicate, illuminate, demonstrate, clarify and make clear. Turning to French, we find that the number of verbs is the same as in English: indiquer, montrer, démontrer, illustrer, mettre en lumière and mettre en éυidence are most commonly used, but there is much more syntactic variation. Thus, French authors are inclined to use prepositional phrases introduced by sur or à partir de (+exemple) in conjunction with verbs like montrer; a number of interesting nominalizations such as en guise d’illustration are also in evidence. The same tendency towards greater syntactic variation can be observed in German. Typical of a language with flexible word order is the relative diversity of prepositional phrases in which the noun Beispiel has been embedded: an einem Beispiel (υerdeutlichen), anhand eines Beispiels (erläutern), durch Beispiele (beleuchten), mit Hilfe einiger Beispiele (glaubhaft machen) . Translational correspondences can be readily set up and do not merit any explanation; nor are there any significant differences in frequency between the languages under investigation. The frequency data show a roughly even distribution of this type of marker in English and French, with German lagging somewhat behind. Group 5: Copular clauses This is another structurally simple type of exemplifier (see Table 4.14). In English, it consists of a subject noun phrase with one of the nouns case, example, instance, illustration or demonstration as its head, a copular verb (usually ‘be’) and a subject complement or, in the case of demonstration, a prepositional phrase which names the actual example. This order may also be reversed, which usually happens when case in point is used in place of the aforementioned nouns. French and German exemplifiers in this group follow very similar patterns. Unlike English and German, French requires the use of the demonstrative celui before the subject complement, unless the latter is a proper noun. Also mandatory is the anaphoric use of en to refer back to the concept being exemplified. Another interesting fact to note is the optional use, in German, of the zero article in front of the noun Beispiel or such adjective-noun collocations as anschauliches Beispiel, bestes Beispiel or jüngstes Beispiel, a usage that may well be obsolescent. Exemplifiers such as on en a un exemple dans NP and beispielhaft für NP ist …are semantically and pragmatically equivalent to the major exemplars of this category. They have therefore been included here. The non-compositional French exemplifier on en a un exemple is not to be confused with its compositional counterpart; in the former the preposition dans introduces the actual example, whereas in the latter it indicates the source of the example. The frequency data show that German, at 106

< previous page

page_130

next page >

< previous page

page_131

next page >

Page 131 Table 4.14 Rank ordering of copular clauses (occurrences in PCAE, PCAF and PCAG respectively) English total: 84 French total: 84 German total: 106 1A(n) (ADJ) example is (that of) 1exemple+être (57): Un autre exemple est 1(Ein) (ADJ) Beispiel für NP (65): celui de la sous-tâche «ordination». NP (hierfür, dafür) ist A frequent example is NP …la loi Debré est NP/complement clause//stellt NP dar An obvious example is NP l’exemple même d’une construction de (100): 2NP is a (ADJ) case in point /A l’immigration comme problème ... Anschauliches Beispiel dafür is… (ADJ) case in point is NP (16): 2exemple+constituer (11): Dafür ist gerade…ein Paradebeispiel. The old English verse Elene is a Rotterdam en constitue l’exemple le plus Bestes Biespiel heirfür ist nach wie notable case in point. flagrant. vor NP 3DET (+ADJ)+illustration 3exemplaire (often with ici/à ce point de 2Beispielhaft/ Bezeichnend/ /demonstration is (PREP) NP: (3) υue/à cet égard/à ce sujet] (7): exemplarisch für NP (hierfür, dafür) Perhaps the easiest illustration is La carrière de Bruneschi est a cet égard ist NP/ camouflage exemplaire. Complement Clause (6): A vivid demonstration of …is in Le cas du…est exemplaire de cette Bezeichnend ist folgende Passage:… studies of… démarche. 4One has, for example,… (etc.) 4exemple+on en a/on en voit (etc.) (7): (0) On en a un bel exemple dans le crime contre l’humanité. 5exemple+représenter (2): Il représente un des exemples les plus réussis d’interaction entre… 6exemple+rester (0): Juin 1940 en reste le meilleur exemple. attestations, is more partial to this kind of exemplifier than English and French. Group 6: Verb-noun collocations of the type example+provide Stylistically speaking, this group contains ‘elegant variations’ of what are essentially the same patterns as those illustrated in Group 5, with the obvious difference that a non-copular verb fills the verb slot (see Table 4.15). Some of the French patterns allow for the optional insertion of a first-person object pronoun (NP nous fournit un nouυel exemple), a construc tion which is not available in English and uncommon in German.

< previous page

page_131

next page >

< previous page

page_132

next page >

Page 132 Table 4.15 Rank ordering of verb-noun collocations of the type example+(e.g.) provide English total: 44 French total: 58 German total: 28 1example+provide (39): …provides 1exemple+fournir (33): 1Beispiel+liefern (17): an illustration of… NP nous fournit un nouvel exemple NP liefert ein anschauliches A good example is provided by NP Beispiel dafür 2example+give (4): 2exemple+offrir (17): 2Beispiel+bieten (10): At this point, perhaps, an example NP offre un exemple canonique Sokrates bietet vielleicht das should be given. Un autre exemple nous est offert par… beste Beispiel dafür,… 3example+afford (1) : 3exemple+donner (8) : 3Beispiel+geben (1) : Another such example is afforded by …en donnent une belle illustration Ein paar markante NP L’Arabie Saoudite donne un exemple d’Etat Beispiele hierfür seien A pertinent illustration is afforded by islamique moderne. gegeben. NP Un exemple intéressant (nous) en est donné par la tête de l’homme. In translation, there is an intralingual and interlingual trade-off between the items in this group and those in Group 4. If, for example, we wish to translate the English sentence NP proυides a fine example of this kind of analysis into French, one possible solution is via a dual class shift: the adjective fine can be transposed to the adverb à merυeille, and the verb-noun collocation proυide+example can be rendered by the verb illustrer: NP illustre à merυeille ce type d’analyse, alongside the more literal NP fournit un bel exemple de ce type d’analyse . The ability of French donner+exemple to occur in two different types of linguistic environment lays bare another type of interlingual divergence. Consider the following examples: Les grammaires disent encore que les adjectifs verbaux issus d’un participe présent ou passé ou d’une de leurs formes préfixées sont presque toujours placés après le nom. Mon corpus donne de nombreux exemples d’infractions à cet usage…(CAF) Les économies régionales autarciques ont existé jusqu’au moment où se sont développés les moyens de communication. G.Kuhnholtz-Lordat en donne un remarquable exemple dans le «pays de Costière» (département du Gard). (EU) L’Arabie Saoudite donne un exemple d’Etat islamique moderne. (EU) De sorte que les villes ont crû, se sont transformées et fragmentées, d’une manière qui dépasse tout ce que l’on avait pu imaginer. Le

< previous page

page_132

next page >

< previous page

page_133

next page >

Page 133 meilleur exemple est donné par Mexico, la ville du monde la plus peuplée, dont il est désormais impossible de fixer les limites et de dresser le plan. (CAF) In the first group of highlighted sentences, donner has retained its full meaning. In functional grammar terms, the subject of donner would be labelled an ‘actor’; the construction belongs to the material process type. It is somewhat different with the second group of sentences, where donner has an equative meaning characteristic of the relational process type. Its subject is a ‘token’ that has a ‘value’ ascribed to it in the form of an object. Since the English collocation giυe+example and the German collocation geben+Beispiel can only be used with material processes, a literal translation of the second group of examples is out of the question. The pattern characteristic of Group 6 is associated with a large range of adjective-noun collocations, and it is highly enlightening to approach these from a contrastive perspective. A number of points are worth making. First, and most obviously, certain segments of the collocational range of example seem to constitute closed sets, while others are not so precisely delimited. An example of a closed set is the ‘oft-cited’ segment, whereas the opposite tendency is discernible in the ‘emotive’ cluster (see Table 4.16). Another cluster allows the attributes of the noun that example qualifies to be ascribed to the latter, witness the following: a giant example with rubberized wooden rollers (NE) ein schamloses Beispiel (NG) Such metaphorical attribution can give rise to a potentially infinite number of unusual word combinations, which are not normally considered collocations. Many of these fall within the scope of the ‘model’ meaning of example, which has not been taken account of here. A small number of adjectives can only be used with (usually human) animates: eminent, infamous, liυing are examples. Second, there are significant collocational gaps to be observed between some of the sets. Practical example and praktisches Beispiel, for instance, have no direct French equivalent, and even the English and the German collocations are not fully congruent. With the former, the emphasis is firmly on the ability of humans to put into practice whatever the example refers to. Practical example may thus be glossed as ‘an example for practice’. By contrast, the German collocation usually occurs in a context where there is a large amount of theorizing, making it difficult for readers or listeners to follow the thread of the argument. The praktisches Beispiel which the writer or lecturer may then provide is more an illustrative example from established practice than an example to be emulated in innovative practice. Further support for this observation may be derived from the fact that the collocation example+practical rarely occurs in exemplificatory infinitive

< previous page

page_133

next page >

< previous page

page_134

next page >

Page 134 Table 4.16 The ‘oft-cited’ and ‘emotive’ clusters English French German oft-cited, much quoted, well-known, well-worn, connu, célèbre, vielzitiert, einschlägig, bekannt, geläufig, famous, favourite, the first known, the best fameux abgedroschen known clear(-er, -est), concrete, eloquent, concret, convaincant, klar, sinnfällig, aussagekräftig, konkret, telling, revealing, illuminating, edifying, percutant, (le plus) anschaulich, aufschlußreich, eindrucksvoll, enlightening, striking, entertaining, impressive, frappant, (le plus) alarmierend, markant, augenfällig, attraktiv, spectacular, vivid, noteworthy, thoughtflagrant, étonnant, (le ernüchternd, anfaßbar, angsterregend, provoking, instructive, moving, emotive, plus) remarquable, aufsehenerregend, beeindruckend, alarming, amazing, amusing, appalling, mild, (le plus) marquant, bedrückend, beredt(este), schlagend, appealing, astonishing, awesome, awe-inspiring, (le plus) parlant, bemerkenswert, bezeichnend, harmlos, awful, bizarre, breathtaking, charming, chilling, eloquent, révélateur, dramatisch, drastisch, eindringlich, colourful, distinguished, compelling, clever, significatif, signifiant, eindrucksvoll, eklatant, relativierend, disturbing, interesting, dramatic, fascinating, macabre, lumineux, ermutigend, grausam, grausig, gravierend, glittering, grotesque, remarkable, wonderful, sad, instructif, éclairant, intéressant, imponierend, instruktiv, tragic, egregious, hideous, anecdotal inoubliable, lehrreich, amüsant, radikal, schrecklich, passionnant, vibrant, schlimm, das schwerwiegendste, spektakulär, pittoresque, triste suggestiv, traurig, unbegreiflich, überzeugend clauses, precisely because one cannot normally adduce a ‘practical example’ for purposes of illustration. The closest French comes to either the English or the German meaning is exemple concret; exemple pratique is extremely rare, and appears to occur only in the ‘model’ sense of exemple (l’organisation du lycée doit être un exemple pratique de démocratie) . Table 4.17 shows the full extent of collocational difference. It is striking that this does not arise from any semantic incompatibility; one may wonder, for instance, why example+triυial cannot be located in any of my corpora— although the collocation appears to be acceptable, it is not in general use. Once very large multilingual corpora become available it will be interesting to look at how translators cope with such subtle cross-linguistic divergences.

< previous page

page_134

next page >

< previous page

page_135

next page >

Page 135 Table 4.17 Differences in collocability between example, exemple and Beispiel (the frequency label rare here refers to cooccurrences which many native speakers would not accept when asked) example+ exemple+ Beispiel+ anecdotal anecdotique (rare) — well-worn — abgedroschen happy/not the happiest heureux (rare) glücklich thought-provoking — nachdenklich stimmend contagious (rare) contagieux ansteckend (rare) dramatic dramatique (rare) dramatisch worked travaillé —(praxisnah, praxiserprobt) edifying édifiant —(?erbaulich→lehrreich, imponierend) —(colourful) pittoresque — clear clair [rare] (frappant, convaincant, parlant) klar (sinnfällig, aussagekräftig, aufschlußreich) oft-cited/much-quoted —(célèbre, fameux) vielzitiert representative (rare) représentatif repräsentativ — criant (‘très manifeste’ [Petit Robert] ) schreiend (rare) drastic (rare) — drastisch — commenté kommentiert suggestive (rare) suggestif (rare) suggestiv — — verfremdet — — ausschmückend — — Musterquick (rare) rapide schnell (rare) A third point to note is that certain types of adjectives are gradable in French, but not usually in English or German, thus giving rise to further collocational gaps. Some of these commonly occur with the noun exemple in the comparative or superlative degree: exemple le plus typique, exemples les plus représentatifs, exemple particulièrement typique French is also alone in allowing postmodification of the head example by two classifying adjectives: l’exemple irlandais υoisin (the example of neighbouring Ireland, das Beispiel des benachbarten Irlands). Fourth, there are interesting differences between the languages under survey with respect to the frequency of particular collocations. These can only be explained with reference to language-internal developments and resultant preferences. The French collocation exemple+caricatural, a pet usage of French journalists, is a case in point. Instances of its English and German equivalents example+grotesque and Beispiel+grotesk are few and far between. Conversely, the German collocation Beispiel+abschreckend is many times more frequent than its potential French equivalents

< previous page

page_135

next page >

< previous page

page_136

next page >

Page 136 exemple+à ne pas suiυre and exemple+dissuasif . The same goes for English extreme example and its literal French and German equivalents. Fifth, there are appreciable interlingual differences in size between some sets. Apart from the unpredictable language-internal developments already referred to, the underlying motivation may be a stylistic one. Consider the literal translation of the adjectival compound+noun collocation example+oft-cited/much-quoted into French. Since French tends to place adjectival modifiers after heads, the resultant French collocation would be the fairly unwieldy exemple souvent cité, a rendering which will be difficult to employ if the noun head example is modified any further. This may explain the French preference for associating nouns such as exemple with non-compound adjectives like connu. Sixth, some of the German exemplifiers under discussion have variations where an adjective-noun collocation alternates with a compound: positives Beispiel →Positiυbeispiel, einschlägiges Beispiel →Standardbeispiel, etc. A final point which should be made here is that article use in the French patterns can be unpredictable. Some syntagmas seem to be so common that the definite article is used where one would normally expect the indefinite article: il est l’exemple rare d’un cinema d’auteurs qui a autant de succès que le cinéma de masse il est l’exemple quasi parfait du self-made man (NF) It may be noted in passing that the various types of defectiveness noted here, whether grammatical or collocational, bear eloquent witness to our view of sentence-fragment SLDMs as composite units rather than free combinations. Even with apparently anodine noun-adjective collocations such as earliest+example, translation is not always straightforward (see Table 4.18). In conclusion, it can be observed that although the English, French and German exemplifiers in Groups 5 and 6 bear clear functional and macrostructural similarities, there are inexhaustably subtle constraints on their microstructural realizations which have so far escaped notice. These often make literal translation impossible. Table 4.19 shows the complete list of adjective-noun collocations found in the corpora examined; they have been crudely categorized by meaning. Table 4.18 earliest+example and its translation equivalents English French German the OED’s earliest le premier exemple de das erste (älteste, früheste) example of this use cet emploi dans le OED Beispiel für diesen Gebrauch im OED

< previous page

page_136

next page >

< previous page

page_137

next page >

Page 137 Table 4.19 Attested adjectival collocates of English example, French exemple and German Beispiel ( Example being a polysemous word, it is well-nigh impossible to draw a sharp line between the senses ‘instance’ and ‘model’, of which only the first engages our attention here [see the introduction to this section]. I have excluded from consideration all clear instances of the second sense, such as exemple+grand or exemple+louable (les grands exemples doivent partir de haut), but I have taken account of borderline cases like outstanding+example or schlimm+Beispieli.) example (‘instance’) exemple Beispiel good, better, the best, bad, admirable, bon, bel, (particulièrement) fort, gut (besseres, bestes), schlecht, worse, the worst, beautiful, mauvais, (le) meilleur*, (le) pire*, hübsch, griffig, trefflich, treffend, beguiling, fine, splendid, brilliant, magnifique, exceptionnel, extraordinaire, auβergewöhnlich, gelungen, exquisite, perfect, supreme, trivial, élémentaire, le plus abouti, priviligié, gekonnt, gläZZnzend, ärachtig, excellent, admirable, choice, parfait (normally preposed), (le plus) trivial, grundlegend, prominent, consummate, extraordinary, édifiant, intéressant, superbe*, splendide*, herausragend, hervorragend, (most) eminent, outstanding excellent, le plus achevé herrlich, leuchtend, wunderbar prime, classic, (un) common, canonique, caractéristique, (le plus) typique, klassisch, ausgezeichnet, typical, characteristic, obvious, (le plus) évident, représentatif, possible berühmte,einprägsam, repräsentativ, blatant, glaring, comparable, typisch, atypisch, charakteristisch conspicuous, notable, notorious, contrasting, dubious oft-cited, much quoted, wellconnu, célèbre, fameux vielzitiert, einschlägig, bekannt, known, well-worn, famous, geläufig, abgedroschen favourite, the first known, the best known useful, practical, convenient, positif, contagieux, rare, puissant* handfest, praktisch, glücklich, valuable, pertinent, apt, apposite, harmlos, hypothetisch, positiv, powerful, anodyne, not the selten, akzeptabel happiest example, happy, hypothethical, rare

< previous page

page_137

next page >

< previous page

page_138

next page >

Page 138 example (‘instance’) exemple Beispiel clear(-er, -est), concrete, eloquent, telling, concret, convaincant, klar, sinnfällig, aussagekräftig, konkret, revealing, illuminating, edifying, percutant, (le plus) anschaulich, aufschluβreich, eindrucksvoll, enlightening, striking, entertaining, frappant, (le plus) alarmierend, markant, augenfällig, attraktiv, impressive, spectacular, vivid, noteworthy, flagrant, étonnant, (le ernüchternd, anfaβbar, angsterregend, thought-provoking, instructive, moving, plus) remarquable, (le aufsehenerregend, beeindruckend, bedruckend, emotive, alarming, amazing, amusing, plus) marquant, (le beredt (este) , schlagend, bemerkenswert, appalling, mild, appealing, astonishing, plus) parlant, éloquent, bezeichnend, harmlos, dramatisch, drastisch, awesome, awe-inspiring, awful, bizarre, révélateur, significatif, eindringlich, eindrucksvoll, eklatant, breathtaking, charming, chilling, colourful, signifiant, macabre, relativierend, ermutigend, grausam, grausig, distinguished, compelling, clever, disturbing, lumineux, instructif, gravierend, interessant, imponierend, instruktiv, interesting, dramatic, fascinating, glittering, éclairant, inoubliable, lehrreich, amüsant, radikal, schrecklich, grotesque, remarkable, wonderful, sad, passionnant, vibrant, schlimm, das schwerwiegendste, spektakulär, tragic, egregious, hideous, anecdotal pittoresque, triste suggestiv, traurig, unbegreiflich, überzeugend simple, crude, crass, stark, elegant, (le plus) caricatural, exotisch, krass, schreiend intricate, sophisticated, extreme, unique cocasse, criant, brief, small extrême, exotique, immonde, unique court, succinct, petit, klein, schlicht, prägnant simple, modeste, ponctuel illustrative, cautionary, authentic, attested, illustratif (d’illustration) illustrierend (?), warnend, mahnend, made-up, isolated, genuine, accompanying, , inverse, attesté, abschreckend, authentisch, konstruiert, fingiert, worked, chosen (+ examples) forgé, contextualisé, verfremdet, praxisnah, ausschmückend, travaillé, à ne pas ausgewählt, kommentiert suivre, contraire, choisi (exemples choisis) commercial allemand et akustisch, historisch, modern, Reutlinger, britannique, nantais, algebraisch, Uhren-, Projekt-, Unterrichts-, anthropologique, culinaire, irlandais voisin, historique, contemporain textbook, counter-, vintage, limit -phare, -type, contre-, Parade-, Negativ-, Positiv-, Standard-, Gegen-, micro Demonstrations-, Anwendungs-, Muster-, absurd, current, earliest, early, innovative, récent,nouvel, ancien, Original-, Gebrauchs-, Fall-, Schulthe latest, recent, random premier (l’un des aktuell,abgestanden, alltäglich, älteste, früh, premiers), analogue (aller) erstes, jüngst, willkürlich herausgegriffen, beliebig, zeitgemäβ, analog

< previous page

page_138

next page >

< previous page

page_139

next page >

Page 139 Group 7: Exemplifiers introducing subordinate clauses This group (see Table 4.20) admits a large range of grammatically diverse exemplifiers, whose lowest common denominator is to be found in their syntactic position at the beginning of a subordinate clause (with the exception of witness ). This clause-initial placement makes possible a very close association of the example and the thing being exemplified. From the reader’s viewpoint, these markers are even less obtrusive than those of the previous groups. As can be seen from the listing in Table 4.20, the interlingual picture is not entirely symmetrical. English and German, for example, lack an exact equivalent of French ainsi dans. One of the English patterns, namely the as+adverb+participle construction, is a productive one; ‘new’ adverb-verb collocations can be coined on the model of the corresponding adjective-noun collocations shown above: striking+example→as strikingly exemplified, conυenient+example →as conveniently exemplified, υiυid+illustration →as vividly illustrated, to name but three among dozens of possibilities. This is another interesting interlingual difference with German and French, where much less variety is to be found. In the German corpus only two adverb-verb collocations are attested, sehr gut+υeranschaulichen and deutlich+zeigen, and in the French corpus we find only one instance of montrer+bien . The frequency data show a clear preponderance of this type of marker in French and German. Group 8: Miscellaneous items We are left with a ragbag of exemplifiers that resist classification altogether. Since these words and phrases also have numerous other functions they have not been compared in terms of frequency. Some examples are given in Table 4.21. 4.1.3 Summary We can summarize this section in the following terms. We have seen that English, French and German use semantically and pragmatically similar sets of exemplifiers. These have so far been perceived as free combinations, but have here been shown to be fairly rigid collocations which exhibit only a small degree of variation. Generalizing across all groups, such variation appears to be somewhat higher in French and in German than in English, with the exception of Group 7, where the English as+adverb+participle construction has more productive potential than its French and German counterparts. Close analysis of exemplificatory infinitive clauses suggests that the large degree of variation found among German items may result from a general German tendency to ad hoc

< previous page

page_139

next page >

< previous page

page_140

next page >

Page 140 Table 4.20 Rank ordering of exemplifiers introducing subordinate clauses English total: 308 French total: 651 German total: 580 as we (you) (can) see from/as can (may) be seen from (by) comme nous le voyons wie an folgendem (11): par cet exemple Beispiel zu erkennen ist …, as we see from such examples as comme on peut le voir ici wie aus dem letzten Flowering plants also respond to their environment, as shown by comme on peut le voir Beispiel ersichtlich (66) the charming example of Linnaeus, flower clock. sur les miniatures comme on voit avec/en (etc.)…(19) as is, for instance, the case in comme c’est/cela est le wie im Fall+Gen./von; as is the case with cas de/pour/ dans (etc.) etwa (83) …as is said to have been the case with (117) Zum Teil werden die… as we see in the case of (68) comme dans le cas (de Relationen such durch as in, as with, as for example (21) NP/qui suit [etc.] ) (100) Präpositionen ausgedrückt, etwa im Italienischen durch dopo. (14) Elle est bien connue des …, wie allein schon der grammairiens, au travers kurze Ausflug in die d’exemples comme celui- Welt des Behaviorismus ci: (0) zeigt (328) as strikingly exemplified by comme/ainsi que le …, wie aus/bei…deutlich as shown by montre (nt) (238): wird (24) as illustrated by comme le montre …, wie aus…sichthch (23) as reflected in l’exemple suivant, …, wie…verdeutlicht (17) as evidenced by prisdans Hemingway …, wie…sehr gut as amply demonstrated by (etc.) (202) comme en témoigne veranschaulicht (3) (118) …, wie…klar ergibt (2) comme le démontre (16) …., wie es uns…deutlich comme en atteste(nt) (5) vor Augen führen (etc.) comme en fait/font foi (0) (3) (as) witness (6): En témoigne (ADV) NP: So (z.B.) in/auf/bei (20) But the imaginative play in which she indulges seems to be less En témoigne l’excellent transcendence of power relations than their aestheticization in exemple que propose… the form of sadomasochistic fantasy. Witness her first words in (25) the shrubbery… Ainsi dans (10) Témoin NP (0) A preuve NP: (0) A titre d’exemple+NP (0) Note English thus, French ainsi and German so were not taken into account here because they are highly frequent oneword markers. Their use in nominal constructions has so far passed unnoticed in the lexicography of English and French; the great bulk of these realize a succession of two clause elements ( thus +NP: The first part of Granger’s investigation focuses on restricted collocations, specifically on amplifiers functioning as modifiers of adjectives (thus, bitterly cold, unbearably ugly); ainsi+NP: ainsi celle de de Gaulle)

< previous page

page_140

next page >

< previous page

page_141

next page >

Page 141 Table 4.21 Miscellaneous exemplifiers English French German say/let us say disons (par exemple) sagen wir einmal among which dont darunter including à titre d’indication beispielhaft for the sake of example formulation which stands in marked contrast with English and French reliance on stock phrases. Further, the frequency data obtained from the parallel corpora show that French exemplifiers occur with considerably higher frequency than English or German items. There is thus empirical support for the hitherto unfounded claim (see Vinay and Darbelnet 1958:222) that, on average, French writers make more extensive use of connectors than their English or German counterparts. This finding has clear implications for the practice and teaching of writing and translation. The frequency counts have also illustrated a principle familiar from other areas of corpus-driven lexicography: just as the commonest meanings of words have been shown to be many times more frequent than their next commonest meanings (Sinclair 1991), so too some standard realizations of SLDMs have a far higher likelihood of occurrence than other items. Finally, there is also some evidence of a correlation between length of SLDM types and frequency of occurrence, although less so in German than in English and French. The translation problems posed by exemplifiers are usually easy to solve, with the exception of collocational gaps: a noun-verb collocation such as exemple+donner, which cannot be translated literally when it encodes a relational process, may turn out to be a pitfall even for the experienced translator. The same holds true for noun-adjective collocations such as exemple+criant. As is evident from such examples, this section also has important implications for linguistics and lexicography at large. It suggests that collocations, far from being mechanical combinations of single words, may be subject to syntactic, semantic or pragmatic constraints. Such constraints need to be mentioned in collocational and other dictionaries (see Part II, and Siepmann 2002b, 2003a). 4.2 Reformulators and resumers Reformulators are a group of much greater compass and heterogeneity than their current lexicographic coverage suggests. Syntactically speaking, reformulators place two clausal units in an appositional relationship. Within the clause the reformulator usually comes before the syntagm it

< previous page

page_141

next page >

< previous page

page_142

next page >

Page 142 bears on (also called ‘second appositive’), as shown by the preliminary examples below: But this still leaves substantial scope for variation in the balance a society places on individual rights versus responsibilities—or, to put it another way, in the emphasis on the individual versus the community. (CAE) «une théorie de la contextualisation des énoncés», c’est-à-dire finalement une branche de la sociolinguistique. (CAF) Diese unübersichtliche Agglomeration mit so vielen Zentren und Vierteln, den abrupten und unverständlichen Ubergängen von gepflegten zu heruntergekommenen Straßenzügen, den verwirrenden Highways und Freeways und Boulevards, das ist das pure Gegenteil der herkömmlichen europäischen Stadtidee. In Zahlen: Das Häusermeer von L.A.und Umgebung erstreckt sich auf einer Länge von rund 200 Kilometern entlang des Pazifiks und einer Tiefe von rund 150 Kilometern ins Landesinnere. (NG) There are, however, a few exceptions to this rule, notably to be precise, in other words and reformulators of the type to put it+adverbial, pour +INF, um…zu +INF; these may also stand after the second appositive: The President of the United States, Richard Nixon in other words, was on television last night. ( Quirk et al. 1972:628) Aujourd’hui les sociétés industrialisées numérisent—digitalisent pour employer un anglicisme devenu populaire… (Monet 1995:15) The struggle between Athens and Macedon—between the forces of freedom and those of tyranny to put it rhetorically perhaps—is nearly overshadowed by the dramatic and unyielding battle waged by Aeschines and Demosthenes in the courts and assemblies of Athens. (CAE) With these syntactic facts in view, reformulation may be defined as ‘a rewording in the second appositive of the lexical content of the first’ (Quirk et al. 1972:631) without specifying the order of the appositives (i.e. the second appositive may also come before the first). It will be noted that the second appositive only notionally provides identical content; rather, from the RST perspective adopted here, it serves to provide additional information with a view to enhancing the reader’s understanding of the

< previous page

page_142

next page >

< previous page

page_143

next page >

Page 143 writer’s intended meaning, thus realizing the equivalence relation termed ‘elaboration’. 4.2.1 Types of reformulators Reformulators may be categorized in a number of ways, of which the most obvious is by source of rewording. This helps us to distinguish between ‘self-reformulators, which introduce a reformulation by the author herself, and ‘other’-reformulators which precede a quotation from a secondary source which the author considers authoritative or witty. There is, of course, considerable overlap between the two classes, and the distinction is more a theoretical than a practically useful one. Some examples follow. 1 Self-reformulators: or rather or more precisely put 2 Other-reformulators: to borrow a well-known formula Aristote le dit lui-même ailleurs As is evident from these examples, the majority of other-reformulators may be included among the class of attributors. Indeed, reformulation often goes hand in hand with citation, as appears from the following example, where the writer, having referred the reader to one of his sources for more detailed discussion, proceeds to pitch the source’s main point in a nutshell: For details, see Dowd (1994, 1995). Briefly put, the central bank would create a new type of financial instrument (CAE) With discourse devices such as to borrow a well-known formula, where no specific personal reference is made, we may regard as the source of the attribution the academic or speech community at large or, more usually, a specific section thereof. The difference with self-reformulators is that this type of rewording is based on factual rather than linguistic knowledge (see below). A second possible categorization is by type of rewording. This helps us to distinguish three cases (Quirk et al. 1972:631–632): 1 The reformulation is based on linguistic knowledge, in which case the discourse following the reformulator is synonymous with that immediately preceding it: terminological inexactitude, in other words a lie (NE)

< previous page

page_143

next page >

< previous page

page_144

next page >

Page 144 2 The reformulation is based on world knowledge. This is often the case with proper nouns: Fred—or Ginger as he is usually called—… ( Quirk et al. 1972:631) 3 The reformulation provides a correction of, or lends greater precision to, what preceded: They started going to the Church, the Catholic Church to be precise. ( Quirk et al. 1972:631) Here again there are uncertain boundaries between the three classes, especially between the first and the second. Lastly, distinctions may be established according to semantic-pragmatic criteria, yielding four main classes, which for lack of better designations we will term ‘pure reformulators and resumers’, ‘gradational reformulators’, ‘repetitional reformulators’ and ‘reformulatory stance markers’. We shall now look at the first three of these classes in greater detail. The fourth class has been excluded from discussion as reformulatory stance markers (such as strictly speaking) were found to be so numerous that they would deserve book-length treatment in their own right. 4.2.2 Pure reformulators Pure reformulators are a fairly small group with relatively distinct border-lines. Table 4.22 provides a broad overview of the devices in question. We are here concerned only with the reformulatory and resuming functions of pure reformulators. Needless to say, they may well do other jobs as well. Thus, besides enabling pure reformulation, the adverb kurz, for example, may also serve to introduce an ironic comment on the preceding discourse. Borrowing from Murat and Cartier-Bresson’s (1987) study on c’est-à-dire, I distinguish two basic modes of pure reformulation, which can be further subdivided. Let us first look at a few examples: (1a) For example, any actor linked to an end actor, that is, any actor that has a partner for whom it is the only partner, is necessarily strong. (CAE) Pour les autres, les ‘ciblistes’, c’est-à-dire ceux qui veulent privilégier à tout prix le texte en langue cible, la traduction doit être conçue de façon à ce que le lecteur appelé à la lire ne se rende pas compte qu’il se trouve en présence d’une traduction. (CAF) (1b) Ce Premier Moteur peut-il être assimilé sans difficulté au Dieu transcendant dont Aristote semblait pressentir l’existence à travers la

< previous page

page_144

next page >

< previous page

page_145

Page 145 Table 4.22 An overview of pure reformulators English French in other words en d’autres termes to put it (in) another way en d’autres mots to put it (somewhat) differently pour le dire en d’autres termes pour le dire en d’autres mots stated another way autrement dit stated differently dit autrement put differently ou formulé autrement put another way dit autrement encore stated alternatively pour le dire autrement equivalently pour dire la même chose autrement disons les choses autrement that is (peut-on dire pourrait-on dire pour ainsi dire en quelque that is to say sorte) which is to say namely i.e. meaning c’est-à-dire viz. je veux dire (etc.) to wit alias soit or (also) called (etc.) literally in ordinary/plain English for short hereafter/henceforth

zero connector

ou qu’est/que fut (etc.) encore appelé (etc.) en bon français en français moderne traduisez en abrégé désormais/ci-après …justement/précisément

zero connector

next page > German mit anderen Worten mit anderen Worten ausgedrückt in anderen Worten in anderen Worten gesagt oder anders (oder) anders ausgedrückt anders gesagt anders gesprochen anders formuliert anders herum formuliert heißt das oder umgekehrt formuliert d.h. (das heißt) also eben sprich alias in Zahlen oder (auch) bzw. resp. kurz auch…nnt (etc.) vulgo im Volksmund auf gut Deutsch gesagt im folgenden/fortan zero connector

structure intelligible (c’est-à-dire, en fait, mathématique) du Ciel étoilé? (CAF) il aime trop à ‘corriger la fortune’—en d’autres termes à tricher. (NF) (2) The earlier specification called for an ensemble of seven, including only two continuo players, that is. an organist and a viola da gamba player. (CAE) La question se pose de savoir si les pays qui ont adhere aux institutions de la francophonie, c’est-à-dire l’Albanie, la Bulgarie, la

< previous page

page_145

next page >

< previous page

page_146

next page >

Page 146 Macédoine, la Moldavie, la Pologne et la Roumanie, peuvent y être intégrés. (CAF) In the sentences grouped under (1a) the writers use the reformulators that is and c’est-à-dire to gloss the technical terms end actor and ciblistes, respectively. Generalizing from this, we can say that one function of pure reformulators is to define a concept by reference to a number of criterial features determining the applicability of the concept; put differently, pure reformulators serve to signal intensional definitions, a use we shall refer to as their ‘intensional’ mode. As the sentences grouped under (1b) attest, such definitions may be either denotative or connotative. Thus, in the first of these sentences, intelligible and mathématique plainly do not refer to the same concepts; rather, the two appositives are connotatively associated only in the writer’s (and the reader’s) mind—other humans may not automatically associate comprehensibility with mathematical rigour. Things are somewhat different with group (2). Here the meaning of the syntagma les pays qui ont adhéré aux institutions de la francophonie does not need glossing, but the average reader may ask herself which countries it applies to. By drawing up a complete list of these countries in the discourse lying to the right of c’est-à-dire, the writer provides an extensional definition, so that this mode of reformulation may be termed ‘extensional’. Murat and Cartier-Bresson (1987:12) distinguish three subtypes of this mode, based on, respectively, specification, co-reference and quantification, exemplified in turn in the following extracts from my corpora: Le droit dérivé, c’est-à-dire les règlements, directives, décisions, recommandations et avis adoptés par les institutions communautaires doit ainsi être en conformité avec les dispositions du droit communautaire primaire relatives à la concurrence tels que les articles 85, 86, 90 TCE. (CAF) On n’aperçoit pas comment il pourrait en être autrement puisque le traité prévoit qu’elle ne «lie» que ses «destinataires», c’est-à-dire les Etats. (CAF) l’abrogation d’un règlement devenu illégal par suite des changements de circonstances n’était obligatoire que si la demande intervenait dans le délai de recours (c’est-à-dire deux mois) (CAF) Despite the theoretical and practical utility of these distinctions, it should be borne in mind that not all authentic examples are amenable to neat classification. A comparison of two studies on c’est-à-dire (Murat and Cartier-Bresson 1987 and Fløttum 1994) highlights the uncertain boundaries between its diverse real-life uses. Thus, in one of its modes we find c’est-à-dire accompanied by en fait, finalement or en clair . As is apparent from

< previous page

page_146

next page >

< previous page

page_147

next page >

Page 147 the semantics of en fait, finalement and en clair, these collocations usually introduce a subjective re-evaluation of the first appositive: «une théorie de la contextualisation des énoncés», c’est-à-dire finalement une branche de la sociolinguistique. (CAF) The point is that, if the human analyst focuses on the logical relationship obtaining between the two appositives, as do Murat and Cartier-Bresson (1987:12), she will construe this sequence as a consecutive structure (‘structure consécutive’), i.e. a subjective variant of an intensional definition; c’est-à-dire is roughly equivalent to donc here. If, on the other hand, she focuses on the semantic relationship between the two appositives, as does Fløttum (1994), she might construe the second appositive as a more precise replacement (‘remplacement’) of the first, with the semes of the lexemes appearing in the second appositive being substituted for one or more semes of the lexemes contained in the first appositive. As explained in the introduction, RST takes such analytical vagaries into account. Nevertheless the above insights should lead to a revision of RST theory insofar as relations obtaining between syntagms below clause level need to be integrated into RST. Pure reformulation may then be described as ‘elaboration’ (rather than ‘restatement’) between text elements, sequences or segments and may be defined thus (see Section 4.2 above): the satellite presents additional detail about some or all of the information contained in the nucleus, or inferentially accessible in the nucleus, in one or more of the ways listed below: 1 set: member 2 abstract: instance 3 whole: part 4 process: step 5 object: attribute 6 generalization: specific This assumes that relations 5 and 6 include co-reference and quantification, although this is not explicitly stated in Mann and Thompson (1988:273). I shall now proceed to offer monolingual analyses of pure reformulators in English, French and German, and then discuss similarities and divergences with the added help of the multilingual corpus. 4.2.2.1 Pure reformulators in English In other words; put another way (etc.) The vast majority of pure reformulators can be found linking units of varying length ranging from short elements to entire text segments. Such is the case with the set of which in other words is the paradigm; the

< previous page

page_147

next page >

< previous page

page_148

next page >

Page 148 members of this set usually realize the intensional mode, with a clear predominance of connotative definitions. Contrast the following examples, noting the various types of punctuation used: Those capacities, all present in men but apparently generally stronger (perhaps partly by reason of hemispheric morphology) in women, include—though doubtless are not limited to—acute sensitivity to changes in the immediate environment, fine-motor skills, an ability to detect and formulate small sensory distinctions, a keen sense of affective/biological relevance, a tolerance for differing or contradictory points of view and the inconsistencies of their interplay, and (as Kramer and Woodruff observed) a powerful faculty for conceptual differentiation and categorization. The recognition of such capacities seems wholly appropriate in an age increasingly wary of objective universals, certainties, and absolutes (male narratives of sameness) and intent on intersubjective particulars, uncertainties, and relatives (female narratives of otherness). To put it another way, our age is witnessing and more or less self-consciously promoting a shift from ‘the grand narratives’ of knowledge to ‘the little narrative’; consequently, as Karlis Racevskis synthesizes a cognate argument, ‘the role of the “universal” intellectual has now given way to that of the “specific” intellectual, the savant or expert.’ (CAE) But this still leaves substantial scope for variation in the balance a society places on individual rights versus responsibilities—or, to put it another way, in the emphasis on the individual versus the community. (CAE) it might be a temporary depression: in other words a suicide wish (CAE) Another feature of this set is that it can introduce affirmative statements as well as questions: I would like to suggest that the solution to this verse is not in grammar or text-critical questions, but in punctuation. To put it another way, why do we assume that…part of the report to Joab? (CAE) Some of the less-common replacements of in other words may also be found in conjunction with attributors: Or to put it somewhat differently, in the words of Joshua Fishman: (CAE) In other words may also realize the extensional/quantificational mode: in the year 2006, in other words in ten years’ time (CAE)

< previous page

page_148

next page >

< previous page

page_149

next page >

Page 149 That is That is can stand as the paradigm of another type of pure reformulator whose most general function is to introduce a more detailed restatement of what goes before. It is close in function to in other words, namely and to be precise, but unlike these it can introduce both intensional and extensional definitions. Like in other words it has scope over differing amounts of the preceding discourse, as aptly illustrated by the following two examples: Only two of these forms of learning can be used to create sophisticated representational systems. These forms of learning are ‘discrimination’ learning (99) and ‘observational’ learning (119). A third form of learning cannot by itself be used to create sophisticated representational systems. What I will call ‘developmental’ learning is the kind of learning which takes place as the result of native capacities which come ‘on-line’ at various points in the developmental process. That is, an organism acquires, or ‘learns,’ new capacities as biological systems mature (92– 93). Since these capacities cannot be substantially altered once they are acquired, this form of learning cannot be used (exclusively) to create a sophisticated representational system. (CAE) Be sure to answer the question that is asked completely, that is, answer all parts of the question. (CAE) The last of the above examples is the best illustration of the mode of that is which closely resembles in other words . In academic writing, this mode often introduces denotative and connotative intensional definitions: A hypersolid, that is, a portion of four-dimensional space, may be separated into two parts by a three-space. (CAE) In this way a truly Western Buddhism might be developed; that is a Buddhism that takes cognizance of and addresses those areas of concern that are of particular importance to those who are attempting to work for creative transformation in the West. (CAE) If the definition amplifies the preceding discourse rather than just explaining it, as it does in the last of the above examples, that is is synonymous with namely . Here is one more example of this mode: Scott (1986) advocates a third usage of the term gender, that is, as an analytical category for understanding the ‘complex connections among various forms of human interaction’. (CAE) In stark contrast to in other words, that is may also introduce a correction:

< previous page

page_149

next page >

< previous page

page_150

next page >

Page 150 Over seventy years before Drumcree and Portadown, the IRA, with the help of a well-organized Sinn Fein, gained Irish Independence from British rule. From their conceptions, both organizations struggled to rally ubiquitous Irish support; that is, until a failed 1916 rising in Dublin resulted in the execution of 15 young ring leaders—stirring Irish nationalism to a boil. (CAE) In its extensional mode, that is can introduce specification, co-reference and, more rarely, quantification. In the first of the following examples of specificative uses, that is may well be replaced by namely (or to be precise, which is not discussed here): The earlier specification called for an ensemble of seven, including only two continuo players, that is, an organist and a viola da gamba player. (CAE) So far, there seems to be just one agreement signed under this law, that is, the one between Australia and the United States. (CAE) Let’s say that an acre-foot of desalinated water—that is, 325, 851 gallons—costs $700 or $1,900 in 1992 dollars (depending on how you figure), as in Santa Barbara, California. (CAE) When the clause following that is begins with the same subject as the preceding clause, pronominal substitution is the rule: As has long been recognized, speech communities are frequently plurilingual, that is, they encompass speakers who belong to more than one language. (CAE) i.e., meaning, namely, υiz., to wit Derived from Latin id est and invariably abbreviated, i.e. is a common variant of that is which may serve the same functions, with the exception of the intensional mode in which that is sees service as an equivalent of in other words, referring back to long stretches of the preceding discourse. It is preferred over that is at the beginning of bracketed syntagmas serving to introduce a list or an amplification of the meaning of the first appositive: 4. Expenditures on a historic structure where the owners failed to obtain certification, and 5. Expenditures for personal property items (i.e., drapes, office equip., furniture, and certain carpeting). (CAE) Thus the Friesian theory has an interesting symmetry: with respect to the immanent, feeling and concept are united in empirical knowledge and understanding, while with respect to the transcendent, feeling

< previous page

page_150

next page >

< previous page

page_151

next page >

Page 151 (Ahndung) and concept (Glaube) both exist but are separate, i.e. we do not and cannot know how to combine them into the same kind of knowledge of the transcendent that we have of the immanent. (CAE) The diagrams on the left hand side demonstrate the processing of a target item (i.e. an item that was present in the two item study list). (CAE) One specific mode of i.e. can be glossed as ‘which here means’. It introduces a specific definition relevant only to the current text: newly independent countries were advised to nationalize foreign holdings and limit capitalist exploitation (i.e. foreign investment) (CAE) Though namely and υiz . are roughly synonymous, the latter, still common in legal parlance, seems to be falling out of use. There is less than one instance to be found in one million words of academic text. Both markers have an extensional mode in which they serve to specify the entities or ideas that have been announced in the preceding discourse. They are thus close in function to the colon, which is often substituted for them in contemporary usage: He identifies five general modes of ideological operation, namely legitimation, dissimulation, unification, fragmentation and reification. (CAE) To this generalisation there is one exception, namely Japan. (CAE) He adduces evidence that other important features of the myth, viz., the spherical earth and the ‘true earth’, are borrowings from Pythagorean cosmology. (CAE) His criticism is levelled at two key concepts, viz. ‘skopos’ and ‘action’ (Handlung). (CAE) In a variant of the specificative mode not shared by υiz., namely may occur in non-restrictive appositive clauses: The great characteristic of equitable estates, namely that they will be destroyed if the legal estate gets into the hands of a purchaser for value without notice, still holds good. (CAE) In its intensional mode, which is not shared by υiz . and has been overlooked by dictionary makers, namely may introduce whole sentences, much as denotative that is does:

< previous page

page_151

next page >

< previous page

page_152

next page >

Page 152 One reading of The cat is behind the truck is similar to The cat is behind the tree; namely it has the truck or tree between speaker or viewer on the one hand, and the cat on the other. (CAE) In their intensional modes, that is and namely are not always interchangeable. When the first appositive is preceded by the indefinite article or by a numeral, that is is excluded: In ‘Reading Female Flesh: Amores 3.1’ Maria Wyke attempts to shed new light on an old crux, namely/*that is in what sense or to what degree ‘“The Elegiac Woman”’ represents historical reality or poetic fiction. (CAE) Another occasional variant of namely is to wit, although it seems to be more common in American English than in British English. Although evidence of to wit is relatively sparse in modern texts, a tendency seems discernible for the device to introduce figures, i.e. to function in an extensional, quantificational mode: It was in this context that Ambassador Kantor—again, following the script—separately issued the Clinton administration’s unilateral estimates that the agreement would lead to vast increases in purchases and market access. To wit: $6.75 billion in increased sales of U.S. parts to the Japanese transplants by 1998; $2.25 billion in increased parts sales to Japan; and 200 new American car dealerships in Japan by the end of this year, increasing to 1,000 by the end of the decade (CAE) (also) called, alternatively named (etc.) Among the most common of pure reformulators is a set which has so far received scant attention. Functionally, this set may be described as extensional/co-referential. It is based on an adverb+past participle collocation drawing on a small number of verbs: know, call, refer to, name, describe and term . While it may just indicate an alternative name for a particular object or idea (also called, otherwise called, alternatiυely named, sometimes referred to as, υariously known as), it is more commonly used to suggest frequency of use (usually called, often termed) as well as diachronic (anciently known as, now called, traditionally called, originally called) , stylistic (popularly known as, technically known as) or geographical (known as…in the US) variation. Here is an example: These radiations, also called ‘super-soft roentgen rays’ (CAE) Oddly enough, the pure reformulator υariously called/known as (etc.) is commonly employed to refer to just two alternatives (although in

< previous page

page_152

next page >

< previous page

page_153

next page >

Page 153 its dictionary sense the adjective υarious refers to a number greater than two): another type of social system variously referred to as the Asiatic, or oriental mode of production. (CAE) The pure reformulators called, usually called (etc.) are sometimes replaced by parentheses: English orthography consists of the set of letters (the alphabet) and their variant forms (e.g. capitals, lower-case), the spelling system, and the set of punctuation marks. (CAE) For short, rather than any of the above, is used to introduce an abbreviation or a shortened reformulation of the preceding discourse; it may precede or follow its referent: part of a worldwide program identified as the International Geophysical Year, IGY for short. (CAE) DOE Complex or, for short, Complex, is a term that denotes all of the DOE sites taken together. (CAE) The same kind of function is more commonly served by parentheses (i.e. the zero connector): the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) (CAE) In mathematical or quasi-mathematical contexts the reformulator equiυalently may sometimes be used. A search in CAE reveals that it mainly occurs in texts on economics; rather than indicating pure reformulation, it normally serves to put two measures on a par: Different vintages of the durable good are available in the market: let i index the vintage (equivalently, age) of the good. A new car is age 1. (CAE) Other items to be grouped among pure reformulators are the adverbs henceforth/hereafter and their variants hereafter termed/hereafter abbreυiated (as)/henceforth referred to as/cited hereafter as, which/whom we will henceforth call or I will refer to these as . They serve to introduce a convenient shorthand for a technical term, a book title or a proper name, usually in the form of an initialism which will then be consistently used throughout the subsequent discourse. Predictably, when used in footnotes, hereafter collocates strongly with such phrases as in (the) text and in parentheses. Albeit quite common,

< previous page

page_153

next page >

< previous page

page_154

next page >

Page 154 this use of hereafter and henceforth has not yet found its way into the major dictionaries of the English language. Examples: where at least one Dennettian agent (henceforth, a DA) has control over the outcome of the set of acts, and where the DAs are potentially in conflict (CAE) Giorgio Morandi pittore (Milan: Edizioni del Milione, 1965), hereafter abbreviated GMP. (CAE) Notes 1 Hereafter cited in the text as Letters of PBS . (CAE) Finally, alias is used to introduce an alternative name for a person: The scholar, Hans Schwerter, alias Hans-Ernst Schneider, faces accusations that he was responsible for supplying medical equipment to be used for experiments on human subjects interned in concentration camps. (NE) or An idiomatic feature of English is the use of or as a pure reformulator indicating that the second oppositive is equivalent to the first. Its function may therefore be described as extensional/co-referential. If we omit from consideration those cases where it serves to coordinate clause-length units (he is, or belieυes that he is, a genius), we may distinguish four main functions: or serves (1) to introduce a translation, (2) to introduce the substitution of untechnical language for a specialist term, (3) to signal the expression of one unit of measurement in terms of another, usually more familiar one, (4) to mark the translation of absolute into relative figures or vice versa. It is more than twice as frequent in newspaper language as in academic prose. The following sentences provide typical examples: Indeed, Gandhi’s technique of non-violent struggle essentially included persuasion. Satyagraha, or Truth Force,’ was before all else a way to win over the ‘enemy’ and make him a friend. (CAE) The technology, pioneered by Professor Richard Friend, a physicist at Cambridge University, substitutes light-emitting polymers (LEPs), or plastics, for traditional semi-conductor materials that make display screens. (NE) Only 11, or 18% of the doctors knew the answer. (NE) On average, 19%, or 19 cents on the dollar. (NE)

< previous page

page_154

next page >

< previous page

page_155

next page >

Page 155 In the first of these modes, or has a common equivalent in the adverb literally: There (1377) he wrote the Muqaddama al-Alamat, literally Introduction to the Uniυerse . (CAE) The use of or as a reformulator usually requires that it be preceded by a comma. Or also has a gradational mode, which is dealt with in Section 4.2.3. Some reformulators show a strong tendency to co-occur with or: that they unlawfully killed, or in plain English murdered, our loved ones. (NE) In our earlier discussion of utility, the only meaningful statements were of the form ‘A has more utility to me than B’ or, equivalently, ‘I prefer A to B.’ (CAE) Or can also combine with phrases such as ‘as it is now known’, ‘as it is (better/fondly/generally) known (in the trade/locally/colloquially)’, ‘as it is called locally/in the report’ (etc.), which specifies the nature of the correction or the information source drawn on: At the time the Zeppelin was a highly charged electrical machine or battery as it were, insulated by the surrounding air. (CAE) In this mode the order of the appositives may sometimes be inverted: Sex or, as it’s more commonly known in England, ‘that-thing-we-do-when-EastEnders-has-finished’. (NE) Table 4.23 summarizes the results of our investigation so far. 4.2.2.2 Pure reformulators in French En d’autres termes French has at its disposal a large set of words of which en d’autres termes is the paradigm. Strikingly, only a few of these have been recorded in the dictionaries. Even Grieve (1996) overlooks en d’autres mots, which has passed into general use. Common variants are autrement dit and dit autrement; other variants such as pour dire la même chose autrement have only limited currency. The members of this set function in the intensional mode and can be followed by both connotative and denotative definitions. Unlike c’est-à-dire, they cannot be used to introduce a correction (Murat and Cartier-Bresson 1987:10).

< previous page

page_155

next page >

< previous page

page_156

next page >

Page 156 Table 4.23 Summary of the functions of English pure reformulators Mode/function Intensional ExtensionalSpecificatiυeCoQuantificational referential in other words, put another way, etc. yes — — — yes that is (cannot follow numerals and yes yes yes yes yes indefinite article) i.e. yes, but cannot link text yes yes yes — segments namely possible (denotative), but yes yes — — rare viz. — yes yes — — to wit — yes yes — — also called — yes — yes — or — yes — yes —

< previous page

page_156

next page >

< previous page

page_157

next page >

Page 157 Grieve (1996:115) is wrong in claiming that ‘a mode with que is sometimes used’ as a variant of autrement dit . As the following examples show, what at first blush may look like a special mode is simply a coordinate series of clauses depending on the same verb, yet separated by a full stop. The que need not always be a repetition of a preceding que, as Grieve (ibid.) maintains; it is sufficient for the verb in the preceding sentence to admit a clausal complement, as attested by the second example: Ceux-ci insistent sur la responsabilité des budgets sociaux dans l’inflation, sur l’effet pernicieux de l’assistance qui brise l’esprit d’initiative et crée une mentalité d’assistés et surtout démontrent, courbe de Laffer à l’appui, qu’il existe une relation inverse entre le taux d’imposition et les recettes fiscales; autrement dit que ‘trop d’impôt tue l’impôt’. (CAF) Le principe d’équivalence joue un rôle essentiel dans la construction de la théorie; il pose (en principe) l’égalité de la masse inerte et de la masse grave. Autrement dit, que toutes les particules et ce, quelle que soit leur composition physico-chimique, «tombent» de la même manière. (CAF) It should be noted that we are not dealing with a specificity of autrement dit: other members of the set can fulfil the same function; indeed, the coordination of syntagmas of identical grammatical structure is a central feature of this paradigm as well as of reformulators in general: Il importe toutefois que l’emprunteur démontre qu’il y avait un lien causal entre la faute et son dommage, en d’autres mots, qu’il aurait pu obtenir de l’assurance ailleurs (CAF) il aime trop à ‘corriger la fortune’—en d’autres termes à tricher. (NF) c’est le parallélisme strict entre syntaxe et sémantique, ou, dit autrement, le caractère compositionnel de la sémantique (CAF) The pure reformulator dit autrement is the only member of the paradigm to have an established variant capable of introducing a second or third rewording: dit autrement encore. In the following example, the author, having just used a term of Leibniz’s to define the ‘machine’ under discussion, appears to feel the need to provide another definition. Note that attributor (pour reprendre un terme de X) and reformulator here go hand in hand: De quoi est faite cette machine? Tout ce que l’on peut en dire pour l’instant, c’est qu’elle est l’expression et l’exprimé de l’activité de tous

< previous page

page_157

next page >

< previous page

page_158

next page >

Page 158 ces intermédiaires, des déplacements dont ils sont le siège et/ou les relais, de ces artefacts matériels et/ou idéels qui composent ensemble, qui ne cessent de s’entre-exprimer pour reprendre un terme de Leibniz, tout en les surplombant tel un virtuel qui ne s’actualiserait que de manière locale et fragmentaire. Dit autrement encore, elle est donc pour partie l’expression et l’exprimé des processus variés qui participent de la ‘stabilisation conjointe de tels ou tels arrangements hybrides dans lesquels éléments dits techniques et éléments dits sociaux, éléments dits humains et éléments dits non-humains etc. sont indissociablement entremêlés’ (CAF) C’est-à-dire (que) C’est-à-dire (que) serves to introduce what the writer considers a more precise rewording of more or less extended stretches of the preceding discourse. In other words, it helps the writer to interpret the first appositive lying to the left of c’est-à-dire as a linguistic sign whose denotative or connotative meaning, as defined by the writer, is given in the second appositive, or vice versa: a) Dans les sociétés qui font un appel public à l’épargne, c’est-à-dire toutes les sociétés cotées en Bourse et quelques autres suivant le degré de diffusion de leur capital, la C.O.B. veille à la qualité et à la fréquence des informations publiées par les entreprises. (CAF) b) Les savants les plus illustres, surtout au XVIIe siècle, se sont penchés sur ce problème et ont cherché à réaliser un régulateur ayant sa période propre, c’est-à-dire un résonateur. (EU) When the ‘linguistic sign’ occurs in the first appositive (a), the relation may bedescribed as one of ‘explanation’; in the opposite case (b), it may be described as ‘denomination’ (Fløttum 1994:118–119). It may be observed that in its denominative function c’est-à-dire can be replaced by en d’autres termes. Such clear examples of the explanatory and denominative modes as those given above are, however, comparatively rare. In a variant of the intensional mode already discussed at the beginning of this section on pure reformulators we find c’est-à-dire accompanied by en fait, finalement or en clair . These collocations usually introduce a subjective reevaluation of the first appositive: «une théorie de la conte xtualisation des énoncés», c’est-à-dire finalement une branche de la sociolinguistique. (CAF) C’est-à-dire likewise collocates with en l’occurrence and its variants en l’espèce and en la circonstance. These variants act to restrict the scope of the intensional definition provided:

< previous page

page_158

next page >

< previous page

page_159

next page >

Page 159 le commentateur applique à son corpus les critères de rationalité que lui-même tient pour les plus appropriés en philosophie, c’est-à-dire en l’occurrence ceux-là mêmes qui ont cours dans les discussions actuelles de la philosophie analytique. (CAF) The force of intensional c’est-à-dire may be modified by the addition of such reformulators as plus largement, plus précisément and plus explicitement: C’est, dans les termes mêmes de l’apôtre, celui de la «justice de Dieu», c’est-à-dire, plus explicitement, la justification de l’homme, par la foi, sans les œuvres de la loi (CAF) In its extensional mode, c’est-à-dire has the full range of functions, namely co-reference, specification and quantification, as attested by the following examples (see also Murat and Cartier-Bresson 1987:12): On n’aperçoit pas comment il pourrait en être autrement puisque le traité prévoit qu’elle ne «lie» que ses «destinataires», c’est-à-dire les Etats. (CAF) Le droit dérivé, c’est-à-dire les règlements, directives, décisions, recommandations et avis adoptés par les institutions communautaires doit ainsi être en conformité avec les dispositions du droit communautaire primaire relatives à la concurrence tels que les articles 85, 86, 90 TCE. (CAF) À partir de là, Descartes affirme être en mesure de fournir l’explication de tous les phénomènes naturels en utilisant les seules ressources des mathématiques, c’est-à-dire de la géométrie (CAF) l’abrogation d’un règlement devenu illégal par suite des changements de circonstances n’était obligatoire que si la demande intervenait dans le délai de recours (c’est-à-dire deux mois) (CAF) Fløttum (1994:120) distinguishes the specificative mode from the generalizing mode. In our terms the latter would be subsumed under the co-referential mode. The specificative mode is characterized by a descending order of generality, whereas the generalizing mode is charac terized by an ascending order of generality. An example of the latter mode follows: Car si l’autonomie de l’édifice renvoie à un modèle extérieur et premier, le corps, encore celui-ci sera-t-il inscriptible dans un cercle et dans un carré, c’est-à-dire dans un ordre. (EU)

< previous page

page_159

next page >

< previous page

page_160

next page >

Page 160 Leaving the functional value of c’est-à-dire, let us proceed to investigate its syntax. Grieve (1996:168) wrongly claims that que is inappropriate ‘when the structure is followed by a finite verb unaccompanied by a subject’; in actual fact, usage wavers, with most writers opting for the mode with que in the case under discussion: La plupart des langages utilisés en mathématiques (il n’en est pas de même en informatique) sont égalitaires, c’està-dire comprennent un symbole de relation binaire distingué appelé symbole d’égalité. (CAF) l’entreprise doit être adhérente à la confédération, c’est-à-dire qu’elle doit avoir cotisé. (CAF) Another syntactic point about c’est-à-dire is that it may be directly followed by a past participle clarifying or enhancing other attributive structures such as adjectives. This is indeed quite common: Dans les relations avec les États, les citoyens et les différents partenaires, le seul domaine auquel le régime linguistique s’applique dans toute son étendue est celui des documents officiels, c’est-à-dire adoptés par les organes décisionnels, qui sont tous traduits et diffusés en onze langues. (CAF) Grieve (1996:169) claims that structural parallelism between previous and subsequent contexts is a constant feature of c’est-à-dire. This is a somewhat hasty conclusion from what must have been too small a corpus. The sentences quoted so far have provided a number of counter-examples, and so do some sentences in which c’est-à-dire is followed by a subordinate clause beginning with conjunctions such as aυant que, lorsque or (même) si: Les programmes d’affects peuvent être déclenchés directement par les inputs subcorticaux, c’est-à-dire avant que l’intégration perceptuelle n’ait eu lieu. (CAF) Indeed, a grammatical peculiarity of this reformulator is that it may introduce substitutions not only of an entire preceding syntagma but of particular constituents thereof. Thus, in the first of the following examples, de personnes déjà identifiées elaborates on the attributive adjective nominatif, itself part of a complex noun phrase, and in the second example, de quinte, de quarte and d’unisson link back to en consonance, which is part of the longer prepositional phrase en rapport de consonance . ils sont utilisés pour la constitution d’un fichier nominatif, c’est-à-dire de personnes déjà identifiées. (CAF)

< previous page

page_160

next page >

< previous page

page_161

next page >

Page 161 cette nouvelle ligne descend et vice versa, les deux lignes devant se trouver constamment en rapport de consonance, c’est-à-dire de quinte, de quarte (qui est le renversement de la quinte) ou d’unisson. (EU) A final point on the syntax of c’est-à-dire: unlike à savoir, to be discussed next, its extensional mode does not allow the first appositive to be preceded by numerals or the indefinite article (Murat and Cartier-Bresson 1987:12). car il y a exactement un nombre égal à 0, à savoir/*c’est-à-dire 0 An occasional variant of the intensional mode of c’est-à-dire que is a parallel structure linked by c’est, each part of which contains an infinitive: Vouloir, c’est pouvoir. Choisir, c’est à la fois éprouver et goûter, apprécier la saveur des choses, c’est aussi préférer, donc sélectionner et renoncer. (CAF) Also, s’entend, albeit usually viewed as a variant of bien entendu, may be seen as a specialized variant of the intensional mode (see Grieve 1996:171). Witness the following example: Il est même possible que la lecture, celle de la littérature s’entend, soit le symptôme d’une secrète maladie de la personnalité. (NF) Grieve (ibid.) identifies another possible replacement in je veux dire, although this may equally well be described as a gradational reformulator equivalent to ou plutôt. Note that this item, by virtue of containing a first-person pronoun, bestows a more personal touch on the definition: Pour être plus précis, Vichy je veux dire sa mémoire me semble au croisement de deux grands phénomènes…(CAF) à savoir à savoir can be used in both the intensional and extensional modes, its main function being that of specification. In its extensional/specificative mode, it is not normally interchangeable with c’est-à-dire, as witness the following examples: (1) La ‘novlangue’ telle que présentée par Orwell (6) me paraissait bien représenter ce que je ressentais profondément, à savoir que/*c’est-à-dire que le langage est aussi un pouvoir, qu’elle est une manifestation humaine si puissante qu’elle peut modifier les hommes, leurs pensées, et leurs actes. (CAF)

< previous page

page_161

next page >

< previous page

page_162

next page >

Page 162 (2) Certaines dysharmonies organiques constituent une gêne au bon fonctionnement du larynx, à savoir/*c’est-àdire: de grandes cordes vocales avec un thorax étroit et de petites cavités de résonance; ou, inversement, de petites cordes vocales, une capacité pulmonaire importante et de grandes cavités de résonance. (EU) (3) Pourtant, elle fait dépendre un comportement, l’offre, d’un événement que le producteur a contribué à provoquer, à savoir/*c’est-à-dire le prix dans la période précédente, ou plus exactement, de la signification que l’acteur prête à l’événement, s’il croit que le prix courant sera fixé au niveau précédent. (EU) These examples show that determiner use, as discussed in the preceding section, is not the only factor blocking the use of c’est-à-dire. Whereas in the case of (3) one might argue that c’est-à-dire cannot be used because éυénement is preceded by the indefinite article, this syntactic line of reasoning is not available with the other examples. Rather, semantic considerations appear to play an important role in examples (1) and (2), where à saυoir has an announcing function reinforced by the wording of the preceding sentence, which on its own would lack closure. In (1) the relative clause ce que je ressentais profondément reveals that the writer is portraying a deeply felt insight and leads the reader to expect further specification of this insight in the subsequent discourse. In its extensional/co-referential mode, à saυoir is fully interchangeable with c’est-à-dire (Murat and Cartier-Bress on 1987:12). Diderot tient le gouvernail: l’Encyclopédie s’adresse à ce qu’il appelle le «peuple», à savoir/c’est-à-dire la collectivité des esprits éclairés. (CAF) Even in such cases, however, it might be argued that there is a difference between à saυoir and c’est-à-dire. A good illustration is provided by the following examples. If a writer wishes to stress that the primary purpose of a tapestry —by definition or common consent—is both to delight and to charm onlookers, then she will use à saυoir. If she wishes to emphasize that this is merely her personal view of a tapestry’s purpose, she might well use c’est-à-dire instead. In other words, à saυoir permits objective or denotative co-reference, c’est-à-dire subjective or connotative co-reference: En proposant leurs modèles, les peintres de cette époque donnèrent à la tapisserie le moyen d’honorer ses intentions premières, à savoir/c’est-à-dire de réjouir et d’enchanter. (EU) This is why c’est-à-dire would be rather unlikely in sentences such as the following, where a connotative intent is less obviously present:

< previous page

page_162

next page >

< previous page

page_163

next page >

Page 163 Car ce sont les problèmes de la mobilité sociale verticale qui sont socialement les plus brûlants, notamment dans les sociétés où la sociologie est développée, à savoir/c’est-à-dire les sociétés industrielles. (EU) à saυoir also has an intensional/denotative mode in which it is fully commutable with c’est-à-dire, a fact overlooked by Murat and Cartier-Bresson (1987). Examples: La tableau est un déictique, ou, pour parler comme les linguistes, un index (à savoir/c’est-à-dire un signe dont la signification dépend de sa co-présence avec son référent ou le contexte physique de son énonciation—tel «ici» ou «toi»): la figure du carré est un index du cadre (carré et cadre ont la même source étymologique) (EU) Les autres sont des groupes de «référence», à savoir/c’est-à-dire des groupes auxquels le sujet se réfère, qu’il y appartienne ou non. (EU) soit Now for soit, the commonest function of which is to indicate the substitutive character of a figure or an amount, as in le recensement de la fin de 1970 montre qu’environ 50 p. 100 de sa population (52,2 dans les villes, 47,8 à la campagne), soit 32589000 personnes, est en âge de travailler. (EU) As would be expected, in this extensional/quantificational mode the marker forms clusters with quantitative expressions which signal a summation, such as au total or un total de, indicate rise and fall, such as une hausse de, or mark an average, such as une moyenne de. In the same mode, it may indicate that the writer is about to provide additional, more accurate information; in the second example below it is close to il s’agit de. les Thaïlandais ne reconnaissent la nationalité chinoise qu’aux «Chinois nationaux», soit à 460000 individus, tandis que les Chinois eux-mêmes estiment être 3 millions. (CAF) la chaîne câblée diffuse en continu une sélection de films auxquels elle a participé en coproduction. Soit une quarantaine d’œuvres abordant les thèmes les plus variés: société, histoire, culture, sciences, musique…(NF) Lastly, it may be used to introduce an appended explanation of what preceded or an inference to be drawn from it; in this intensional/ connotative mode, it is commutable with c’est-à-dire.

< previous page

page_163

next page >

< previous page

page_164

next page >

Page 164 Le serveur, fort de sa base de données internationale, annonce 70000 offres d’emploi. Soit un choix intéressant pour tous ceux qui souhaitent s’expatrier. (NF) A syntactic point about soit evident from these examples is its tendency either to occur in a verbless clause of its own or to be inserted parenthetically within another clause—a special case of interpolated coordination. encore appelé, autrement nommé (etc.) The French set of which encore appelé may be seen as the paradigm has roughly the same size as the English set based on also called. One difference is that, for syntactic reasons, a relative clause is often preferred over a participial clause in French. The French set fulfils exactly the same extensional/co-referential function, that is, that of alternative naming (que nous (dé)nommons/appelons, encore/aussi/également nommé/appelé, autrement nommé/appelé, parfois appelé, diυersement désigné sous le nom de), often with specific emphasis on frequency (couramment appelé, généralement appelé, [plus] communément appelé), diachronic (alors nommé, anciennement nommé, autrefois nommé, que l’on a nommé), stylistic (joliment appelé, improprement appelé, ironiquement appelé, officiellement appelé, pudique ment appelé, plus simplement appelé, υulgairement appelé,…) or geographical variation (appelé localement, que les Américains appellent, que l’on appelle…outre-Rhin): un nombre très restreint d’éléments actifs, appelés éléments sources ou éléments fondateurs (CAF) la randonnée palmée (aussi appelée snorkelling) permet à ceux qui ne pratiquent pas la plongée de découvrir, eux aussi, la faune et la flore sous-marines. (NF) Cette relation appelée couramment ‘courbe de concordance’ permet de calculer des diamètres discriminants (CAF) Une nouvelle saison se cherche, diversement nommée: souveraineté, maturité, fête, ennui. (NF) Oddly, there is also an inverse mode of this reformulator, in which the second appositive provides the original name rather than the reformulation. In this case the reformulator comes after the second appositive: le Sentier lumineux reste lourd à digérer avec son culte stalinomaoïsant à la gloire du ’Président Gonzalo’ (Abimaël Guzman ainsi nommé), leader du Parti communiste péruvien-Sentier lumineux, emprisonné à vie depuis 1992. (NF)

< previous page

page_164

next page >

< previous page

page_165

next page >

Page 165 Pour faire court may serve to introduce a briefer rewording of a complex notion: Il faudrait définir les CD-ROM et CD-I comme des documents multimodaux interactifs a support numérique, ou, pour faire court comme des hyperdocuments. (CAF) En abrégé and its shortened form abrégé, which only occurs in brackets, have a similar function, with the difference that they refer more commonly to acronyms, initialisms or formulae. They may be placed before or after the phrase they qualify: Dans ce document, le terme générique grands inυestisseurs (ou GI en abrégé) désignera l’ensemble de ces points extrêmes, tandis que le terme extrapolables fera référence aux autres individus de l’échantillon. (CAF) Chacun des arcs est interprété comme signifiant «est sorte de» ou en abrégé «est-un». (CAF) Both en abrégé and its synonym siglé (en) have so far gone unrecorded in the major dictionaries of French: Des termes d’action: broyage, extraction, centrifugation, chromatographie pas de gaz, siglée en CPG…) (Siglé) désormais serves to introduce a convenient shorthand for a technical term, a book title or a proper name, usually in the form of an initialism which will then be consistently used throughout the subsequent discourse. There are three major variants of this device: ci-après, dorénaυant appelé/nommé and désigné dans la suite de (cet article/ce compte-rendu) par le sigle. Ci-après collocates strongly with cité, especially in Canadian French, and is frequently followed by a colon or comma: l’individu-clef du cycle de développement de Varroa est la femelle adulte, dorénavant nommée ‘fondatrice’. Deux phases symbiotiques rythment alternativement la vie d’une fondatrice…(CAF) Code de procédure pénale, ci-après CPP. (CAF) Projet d’acte final reprenant les résultats des négociations commerciales multilatérales de l’Uruguay Round, Genève, Secrétariat du GATT, 20 décembre 1991 (ci-après cité: «Rapport Dunkel»). (CAF) As its form suggests, traduisez is a variant of encore appelé which may serve

< previous page

page_165

next page >

< previous page

page_166

next page >

Page 166 to introduce a translation; it is more common in newspaper language than in academic writing, and occurs with particular frequency in the field of computing: Mais ‘on peut plaire à Dieu et rester féminines’, certifie-t-on chez Tekbir (traduisez: ‘le Seul-l’Unique’, par un mauvais jeu de mots sur le monothéisme). (NF) In another mode, traduisez helps to translate pretentious or unintelligible jargon into everyday language: Tandis que le quartier de la Bastille, miné par les restaurants pour touristes, s’étiole et qu’Oberkampf commence à prendre un coup de vieux, la ville de Montreuil, à l’est de Paris, attire une population toujours plus nombreuse de ‘nupies’ (traduisez: néo-urbains professionnels). (NF) ZARMA, le céfran natchave! Traduisez: Ma parole, le français va à vaul’eau! (NF) justement can also assume the function of resuming a word or phrase, with the peculiarity that the repeated word always stands to its left: Il a suffi d’une pléiade d’écrivains-philosophes exceptionnels pour exprimer leur temps et en faire un «siècle»—le siècle, justement, de la philosophie des Lumières. (NF) ou The French reformulator ou has a co-referential mode in which it commonly links two noun groups. Either it can introduce an alternative designation: (1) le «tableau périodique», ou «tableau de Mendeleïev» (EU) or it can signal a definition, thereby functioning as a synonym of autrement dit: (2) la paratextualité, ou relation que le texte entretient avec son environnement (EU) In a third variant of this mode, it is roughly equivalent to ‘which is or are’; French also offers a more elegant option to express this function, namely constructions of the type ce cancer social qu’est l’exclusion (Gallagher 2000). Thus, the following example may be rephrased as la consommation de l’acte qu’est la lecture du liυre:

< previous page

page_166

next page >

< previous page

page_167

next page >

Page 167 (3) la consommation de l’acte, ou la lecture du livre (MTC) The above examples show that Tamba (1987:19) is wrong in claiming that the second appositive is generally employed ‘en mention’. In example (1), for instance, both appositives are technical terms, and in example (2) the definition follows the technical term. It is also doubtful whether ou can always be replaced by the zero connector (Tamba 1987:20), as in on considère comme réelles (vraies) l’affirmation ou la négation This option is definitely ruled out in the third of our examples, and in a number of examples that Tamba herself cites. The third example also suggests that, contrary to received wisdom, the definite article may sometimes occur in front of the second appositive. Table 4.24 summarizes the results of our investigation so far. 4.2.2.3 Pure reformulators in German mit anderen Worten By comparison with its French and English counterparts, the German set of pure reformulators grouped around mit anderen Worten is a motley collection, including such unexpected items as oder anders and also . The members of this set realize the intensional mode, with a clear predominance of connotative definitions. Mit anderen Worten and its variant in anderen Worten occur almost exclusively in sentence-initial position. They are followed by a comma or a colon: Bisher habe ich jedoch nur Ableitungen von Beispielen vorgeführt, von denen bereits klar war, dass sie wohlgebildet sind. In anderen Worten, die bisher vorgestellte Grammatik hat nur ihre Beobachtungsadäquatheit gezeigt. (CAG) Wichtig zu wissen ist, dass der Airbag bei einem Aufprall in Millisekunden aktiviert wird, kurz nachdem die Verformung des Autos begonnen hat. Er kann aber seine volle Schutzwirkung nur bei angelegtem Gurt erfüllen. Mit anderen Worten: die Kombination von Gurt plus Gurtstraffer plus Airbag ist bis jetzt—wohlgemerkt in Verbindung mit dem gestaltfesten Lebensraum—, das beste Rück-halte-System für Fahrer und Beifahrer im Ernstfall…(NG) It is rare for these devices to enable a link between alternative formulations of short syntagmas: Die Rückwendung zu längst überholten legitimistischen Traditionen

< previous page

page_167

next page >

< previous page

page_168

next page >

Page 168 Table 4.24 Summary of the functions of French pure reformulators Mode/function Intensional ExtensionalSpecificatiυeCoQuantificational referential en d’autres termes, autrement dit (etc.) yes — — — — c’est-à-dire (cannot follow numerals and yes yes yes yes yes indefinite article) à savoir possible (denotative), yes yes yes possible, but but rare rare soit possible (connotative), — — — yes but rare encore appelé — yes — yes — ou — yes — yes —

< previous page

page_168

next page >

< previous page

page_169

next page >

Page 169 beinhaltet eine Absage an eine konsequente Neuorientierung, mit anderen Worten an einen Reformkurs. (NG) Oder anders is a fairly common academic variant of mit anderen Worten which links sentences. In a mode not to be confused with this one, anders is used on its own as a means of cross-referencing in dictionaries or encyclopaedias; it is often followed by a colon (anders: allgemeines Monopol) . An example of oder anders follows: Um mich überhaupt als Grund von etwas anderes als meiner selbst zu erfassen, muß ich mich darin als nicht der Grund meiner selbst erfassen. Oder anders: die Übernahme meines Grundseins (Verantwortung) geschieht grundlos (Selbstverantwortung). Ich kann nur existieren, weil ich nicht der Grund für mein mögliches Grundsein bin. (CAG) also, d.h. Also is a moderately common reformulator introducing an explanation, a more precise rewording or an inference. It can occur in both the extensional and intensional modes and has scope over short syntagmas. The first two examples which follow illustrate the intensional mode in its denotative sub-mode; the third affords an illustration of the connotative sub-mode: Etwa haben Link (1983 und 1984), Blau (1981) und andere dafür argumentiert, Gruppen nicht als Mengen, also abgeleitete Konstrukte, sondern als Individuen (als mereologische Summen oder verbandstheoretische joins) zu modellieren. (CAG) Solche ‘Inkarnation’, also Fleischwerdung, bringt uns in eine wundervolle und gleichsam schauerliche Nähe zur Welt. (CAG) des kommunikativen Sprachunterrichts auf und entstammt der Notwendigkeit, Bewertungsverfahren zu entwickeln, die funktionalen (also kommunikativen) Sprachgebrauch messen können. (CAG) Common clusters that this mode of also enters into include also gleichsam, also υomehmlich, also de facto, also faktisch, also letztlich, also gleichsam/gewissermaβen, also insbesondere, also eigentlich and also auch. Over and above their resumptive function, some of these clearly have conclusive force, thus illustrating the connotative mode. In the first of the following examples the noun phrase lying to the right of also auch is subsumed under the more general category of the preceding noun phrase; in the second example also eigentlich introduces an inference made by the author:

< previous page

page_169

next page >

< previous page

page_170

next page >

Page 170 Das utopische Bild ist ein Bild dessen, was ‘sein soll’, wovon der Bildende (also auch der Lehrende) ‘wünscht’, dass es sei. (CAG) wie diese Variablen ihren aktuellen Wert oft überhaupt nur durch die—über allen Zweifel erhabene, also eigentlich überflüssige—Versicherung erhalten, alles sei tatsächlich heute passiert. (CAG) The following example illustrates the extensional/co-referential mode: Ort der Kritik ist für Aristoteles nicht im Bereich der theoretischen Wissenschaften (theoria), also der Physik, Mathematik und Theologie (Erste Philosophie, Metaphysik), denn diese betrachten das, was ist. (CAG) In its extensional/quantificational mode also collocates with quantitative expressions signalling a summation, often in conjunction with insgesamt: z.B. 4000 Exemplare, die von jeweils 20 Lesern gelesen werden, also insgesamt 30.000 Leser für eine Schrift (CAG) The marker often introduces a syntagma syntactically parallel to the preceding one: Die fragliche Kategorie X läßt sich jedoch als N/PP, also als eine Funktorkategorie rekonstruieren, die eine PP nimmt, um ein N zu ergeben. (CAG) In an intensional/denotative mode equivalent to that of also, d.h. may assume a purely explicative function: Durch seinen induktiven und experimentellen Nachweis der konstitutiven Bedeutung von Denkprozessen bei der Entstehung unseres Bewußtseins einer Außenwelt habe Helmholtz ‘ein unsterbliches Verdienst erworben’ und durch seine Arbeit den Intuitionismus, d.h. die Lehre vom unmittelbaren Gegebensein eines Außen, ‘definitiv’ beseitigt. (CAG) Frequently, however, the device has a strongly conclusive (i.e. connotative) value, especially in combination with letztlich, where it may signal that the author is taking her argument to its logical conclusion: Ohne Zweifel sind die heute neu initiierten Regelungen wohlmeinend, vordergründig auch sachkundig, doch reflektieren die Regelungsgeber wie auch die am Entscheidungsprozeß beteiligten

< previous page

page_170

next page >

< previous page

page_171

next page >

Page 171 Experten oft nicht diese mikroökonomischen Wirkungen ihrer Aktivitäten. D.h. letztlich, sie wissen zwar, was sie wollen, aber oft nicht, was sie tun bzw. bewirken. (CAG) Notably common collocations which realize different modes include d.h. hier (intensional/denotative), d.h. sozusagen (intensional/connotative), d.h. υor allem (extensional/specificative), d.h. zum Beispiel (extensional/specificative) and d.h. im einzelnen (extensional/specificative). Some examples: Zum andern, und das ist noch einmal an späterer Stelle kritisch aufzunehmen, versteht sich nach saussureschem Kontext (5) langage offenbar auch als die symbolische Ordnung, die Menge aller Zeichen-systeme des Menschen, d.h. sozusagen als ein ‘System aller Systeme’. (CAG) Einmal davon abgesehen, dass dieser Prozeß auch von der Wissenschaft (d.h. hier der Psycholinguistik) noch nicht erschöpfend erforscht ist. (CAG) Derzeit stehen im Bereich der elektronischen Publikationen noch die Offline-Versionen—d.h. vor allem die CD-ROMDatenbanken—im Vordergrund. (CAG) From a syntactic point of view, it is interesting to note that d.h. may enhance or clarify a preceding attributive structure, or indeed, any other sentence constituent: Nicht mehr nur die lästige Entsorgung von etwas überflüssigem wird eine Pflicht öffentlicher Daseinsvorsorge, sondern eine geordnete, d.h. nach Maßgabe der Vorschriften des Abfallgesetzes durchzuführende Entsorgung wird zur Pflicht der zuständigen Körperschaften gemacht, um Umweltsicherung zu betreiben. (CAG) Und dies in der Weise, dass allgemein (d.h. für Frauen und für Männer) nachvollziehbar philosophisch argumentiert wird (CAG) So wie man das Wasser nicht lehren muß, wohin es fließen soll, so geht nach Comenius der Fluß des Lernens seinen natürlichen und erfolgreichen Gang, wenn er nur richtig in Gang gekommen ist, d.h. wenn wir bis zu den Quellen zurückgegangen sind, um ihn dort zu beginnen. (CAG) D.h. may also follow nouns expressing an idea or an opinion, in which case it often introduces appositive noun clauses:

< previous page

page_171

next page >

< previous page

page_172

next page >

Page 172 Bis zur Novellierung galt das Prinzip der strikten Kostendeckung, d.h., Einnahmen und Ausgaben mußten deckungsgleich sein. (NG) nämlich nämlich can be used in both the intensional and extensional modes, its main function being that of specification. In its extensional/specificative mode, it is not normally interchangeable with d.h., as witness the following examples: Erstens gibt es mindestens drei weitere Übersetzungsmöglichkeiten für ‘Unmut’, nämlich/*d.h. ‘mécontentement’, ‘malaise’ und ‘grogne’…(CAG) In Beispiel (86) steht das erste Argument von gab, nämlich/*d.h. den Abschied, nicht direkt neben dem Funktor. (CAG) Diese Solidarität beruht auf einem Gedankenfehler, dem schon ganz andere verfallen sind (Marx/Lenin), nämlich/*d.h. dem, daß alle Menschen gleich wären. (CAG) In its extensional/co-referential mode, nämlich is fully interchangeable with d.h., as can be seen from the following instances: Wem sein Augenlicht lieb ist, sollte also beim Sonnenbrillenkauf mehr auf die ‘inneren Werte’, nämlich/d.h. den UVSchutz, schauen, als auf Schick. (NG) Die Betonung dieser ‘Menschheitsaufgaben’, nämlich/d.h. die Sicherung der ‘natürlichen Lebensgrundlagen’, des Friedens und die Schaffung einer ‘gerechten Weltwirtschaftsordnung’, nennt Vogel als die erste von insgesamt zehn ‘Hauptbotschaften’ des Programms. (NG) Sometimes nämlich occurs with figures; since nämlich cannot be replaced by d.h. in this case, and since it maintains its announcing function, we will treat this mode as a special case of the specificative mode rather than a type of quantificational mode: Etwas preiswerter kommt die ‘Farb- und Stilberatung’, nämlich für 39,80 Mark. (NG) in Zahlen and in Zahlen ausgedrückt heiβt das are occasional variants of the extensional/quantificational mode of d.h.: Diese unübersichtliche Agglomeration mit so vielen Zentren und Vierteln, den abrupten und unverständlichen Ubergängen von gepflegten zu heruntergekommenen Straßenzügen, den verwirren-

< previous page

page_172

next page >

< previous page

page_173

next page >

Page 173 den Highways und Freeways und Boulevards, das ist das pure Gegenteil der herkömmlichen europäischen Stadtidee. In Zahlen: Das Häusermeer von L.A. und Umgebung erstreckt sich auf einer Länge von rund 200 Kilometern entlang des Pazifiks und einer Tiefe von rund 150 Kilometern ins Landesinnere. (NG) Another fairly rare variant of d.h. is eben . It occurs in the extensional/specificative mode, usually indicating that the second appositive has already been mentioned: Manche rudimentären Sprachen—eben elementare Lernervarietäten oder Pidgins—haben den letzteren Modus nicht oder nur in Ansätzen. (CAG) sprich Sprich is used in an intensional/connotative mode. It can link syntagms of varying length, as shown in the following examples: Ein solcher Einbruch in das Reich akademischer, sprich männlicher Würden war zu ihrer Zeit nur durch männliche Unterstützung möglich. (NG) Auch Zacharias Werner traf der vernichtende Blitzstrahl des Weimarer Dichtergottes; sein Drama sei abstrus und mystisch, sprich: ebenso ungeeignet für die Bühne wie das von Kleist. (NG) It also has a highly specialized mode in which it serves to introduce the pronunciation of a mathematical sign or natural-language expression: ,>’ (sprich: , größer’, ,echt größer’ oder, strikt größer’) (CAG) Auf Mackinac (sprich: Mäkinoh) ist Waffentragen, einmalig in den USA, genehmigungspflichtig und hier herrscht seit hundert Jahren striktes Autoverbot. (NG) auch…genannt (etc.) The German set of which auch…genannt may be viewed as the paradigm appears to be smaller than the English or French sets. Consider the following two examples: Dienstleistungen von Unternehmungen, auch Absatzleistungen genannt. (CAG) mit Hilfe von Balkendiagrammen, in der Literatur auch als Balken-plan bekannt,…(CAG)

< previous page

page_173

next page >

< previous page

page_174

next page >

Page 174 The participial relative clause may include attributions to sources: Produktionsprozeßplanung (von E.Gutenberg als Prozeßplanung bezeichnet) (CAG) Apart from these participial relative clauses, German often resorts to full-length relative clauses: folgende Merkmale schreiben die Wissenschaftler Menschen um das 20. Lebensjahr herum zu, die auch als ‘Twentysomethings’ bezeichnet werden (NG) German has an additional, though comparatively rare, reformulator which realizes a specific mode of the auch… genannt paradigm; namely, υulgo . Vulgo is a Latinate synonym of umgangssprachlich…(auch) genannt: An diesem Nachmittag steht er hoch über dem noblen Port Andratx, vulgo Düsseldorfer Loch, vor einer riesigen Villa, die er auch versichert hat, und sinniert über das eigenartige Leben auf dieser Insel. (NG) An occasional variant, to be found especially in works of reference, is auch on its own, or oder auch: Unter Wörterbucheinleitung (auch Wörterbuchυorwort ) wird dabei ein heterogener Wörterbuchbauteil verstanden (CAG) Europäische Rechnungseinheit (oder auch ERE) (CAG) The pure reformulators kurz, oder kurz and oder auch kurz…genannt are sometimes used to introduce an abbreviation, but they more commonly serve to introduce a shorter, more widely known variant of a term: Wichtiges Kernstück dieser Dimension ist die 1989—ohne die Stimme Großbritanniens—vom Europäischen Rat angenommene ‘Gemein-schaftscharta der sozialen Grundrechte der Arbeitnehmer’ (kurz: Sozialcharta) (CAG) Für die Fortgeschrittenen gibt es dann auch noch solche Schmankerl wie den ‘Handgelenksaußendrehwurf, oder auch kurz Kote-gaeshi genannt. (NG) In the case of initialisms or acronyms, German frequently omits a lexical link. Im folgenden and its variants im folgenden zitiert als, im folgenden zit. als, im folgenden mit…abgekürzt, im folgenden…genannt may be seen as a special

< previous page

page_174

next page >

< previous page

page_175

next page >

Page 175 case of kurz; like English hereafter and French désormais these SLDMs are often used to introduce a convenient shorthand: Langenscheidts Groβwörterbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache (im folgenden: Lgwdaf) (CAG) Bertolt Brecht, Gesammelte Werke in 20 Bänden, Frankfurt/M. 1967ff. (im folgenden zitiert als: GW) (CAG) The time adverb fortan can also serve this function: Gibt es Sprachmittel, oder besser Sektionen sprachlichen Verhaltens, die von besonderer Relevanz sind bei/in ‘Kulturkontakt’ (fortan KK), die wichtiger, häufiger, zentraler sind als andere? (CAG) bzw. Beziehungsweise is a reformulator more or less peculiar to German. It has three different modes. In its first mode it indicates a choice between two alternatives, after the manner of adversative oder: fremdkulturelle bzw. eigenkulturelle Setzungen (CAG) Daraus, dass Filme narrative Schlüsse evozieren und damit in den Bereich der Konstruktionen übergehen bzw. in ihrer Apparatur bereits eine Konstruktion enthalten, läßt sich aber nicht der Schluß entwinden, es gäbe dort keine Referenzialität, oder Filme repräsentierten die Welt in keiner Weise, die jenseits des Fiktiven liegt. (CAG) In its second mode, it helps underscore a relationship of synonymy or substitutability, thus realizing the extensional/co-referential mode. Häufig ist die Denotation bzw. Begriffsextension in der Fachsprache wegen stärkerer Differenzierung geringer (CAG) Nachschlagewerke wie Lexika, Grammatiken und Wörterbücher sind nicht mehr in Papierform, sondern auf CD-ROM respektive direkt ins Netz gespeichert. (CAG) In its third mode it serves to list a number of attributes that relate separately to each of several things or people listed in the previous discourse: der sich 1950 noch auf 17,8% beim Verkehrsaufkommen und 37,7% bei den Verkehrsleistungen belaufen hatte, schon 1960 auf 6,1 bzw. 16,1% geschrumpft (1990:2,8 bzw, 6,2%) (CAG) Table 4.25 summarizes the results of our investigation so far.

< previous page

page_175

next page >

< previous page Page 176 Table 4.25 Summary Mode/function mit anderen Worten oder anders also d. h. nämlich in Zahlen sprich auch genannt bzw.

of the functions of German pure reformulators Intensional Extensional yes — yes (links sentences) — yes (usually links short syntagms) yes yes yes — yes — — yes — — yes — yes

< previous page

next page >

page_176

page_176

Specificatiυe — — yes yes yes — — — —

Co-referential — — yes yes yes — — yes yes

Quantificational — — yes yes — yes — — —

next page >

< previous page

page_177

next page >

Page 177 4.2.2.4 Differences and similarities between English and French pure reformulators In what follows I shall try to shed some light on the complexities surrounding the translation of pure reformulators, proposing unidirectional transfer rules for English-French and French-English translation. As many of the insights to be discussed here can be inferred from the above monolingual treatments, I shall content myself with detailed observations on this language pair only. The reader interested in German-French translation is referred to Courdier et al. (1994, 1998) for a near-exhaustive discussion of the rendition of the two pure reformulators also and nämlich into French. Let us first compare the synoptic tables given above with a view to ferreting out general equivalences. The most salient facts to be noted are as follows: 1 that is, c’est-à-dire and das heiβt all have the full range of intensional and extensional modes, which suggests a great degree of translational compatibility. 2 in other words, en d’autres termes and mit anderen Worten all occur in the intensional mode. But in other words also has an extensional mode, so that some translation problems will arise. 3 Even at this level of delicacy, it is clear that the remaining pure reformulators (i.e., namely, to wit, à saυoir, soit, also, in Zahlen) show more complex equivalence relations. I shall now consider in sequence three main groups of pure reformulators: that is vs. c’est-à-dire, in other words vs. en d’autres termes and also called vs. encore appelé . In so doing, I shall supplement as far as possible the monolingual analyses offered above with data from the multilingual corpus. Before proceeding, it may well be worth reminding the reader (see Part II, Chapter 3) that the standard English-French dictionaries are extremely patchy in their coverage of these expressions. Two major deficiencies are apparent: first, some common expressions, such as namely that, en d’autres mots or encore appelé have gone unrecorded, not to speak of rarer SLDMs that are nevertheless indispensable in academic discourse, such as hereafter, to wit or pour le dire en d’autres termes; second, those that have been recorded are presented out of context, a treatment which wrongly suggests perfect equivalence between the two languages. that is υs. c’est-à-dire Although the above analysis has shown that that is and c’est-à-dire closely parallel each other in all of their modes, it would be somewhat naive to assume, as do Murat and Cartier-Bresson (1987:5) on the basis of a monolingual [sic!] investigation of c’est-à-dire, that ‘despite the appreciable difference in their literal meaning, these expressions are equivalent in

< previous page

page_177

next page >

< previous page

page_178

next page >

Page 178 translation’ (‘malgré la divergence appreciable de leur contenu littéral, ces expressions sont bien équivalentes en traduction’). A scrutiny of the multilingual corpus for all occurrences of that is, with the exception of instances imitating speech and clear mistranslations, yielded the results shown in Table 4.26. It is apparent that a number of translations other than c’est-à-dire have to be taken into account. Most striking is the large number of instances in which that is is rendered by the zero connector. The examples which follow shed some light on the conditions under which the zero connector is more acceptable than other translations. In the first set of examples, that is occurs in an extensional mode close in meaning to namely . The second appositive is announced in the preceding discourse by means of numerals (one) or other deictic devices (I want to say something about) . In French the zero connector usually takes the form of a colon or a comma, as shown in Table 4.27. The second set of examples shows that is introducing an intensional definition, which may be connotative or denotative. French again uses the colon or the comma (see Table 4.28). Table 4.26 Frequency of various French equivalents of that is in MTC French equivalents of that is Number of occurrences in MTC c’est-à-dire/je υeux dire/nous dirions 50/2/1=53 zero connector 18 en d’autres termes/autrement dit 7 à saυoir 2 donc 2 ou 1 soit 1 justement 1 en tout cas 1 pour le dire brièυement 1 et plus exactement 1 syntactic devices 10 Table 4.27 Extensional that is in English vs. zero in French that is zero there is only one way in which they can obtain redress for this threat, that Il est une seule manière de réparer is, by beheading the king who could formerly behead them the basic entièrement les torts de pareille menace: situation of the delirium—that is, a single large individual seeing himself in on décapite le roi décapiteur. opposition to a numberless host of tiny agressors—does exist… La situation fondamentale du délire, la situation du grand individu qui se voit en butte à une infinité d’agresseurs minuscules est donnée en tant que telle…

< previous page

page_178

next page >

< previous page

page_179

next page >

Page 179 The intensional/explicative mode of that is also tends to be rendered by zero (see Table 4.29). Sometimes extensional that is is exactly synonymous with namely; in this case à saυoir and soit suggest themselves as translational variants of c’est-à-dire (see Table 4.30). An alternative translation for that is is offered by en d’autres termes in its Table 4.28 Intensional that is in English vs. zero in French that is zero connector In the investigation reported below, Carroll, Dietrich Dans l’étude que nous allons reporter ci-dessous, Carroll, and Storch (1982) scrutizined a corpus of speech for Dietrich et Storch (1982) ont recherché dans un corpus all corrections of inflected words, that is, verbs, enregistré d’allemand langue étrangère toutes les corrections adjectives, pronouns, nouns, and the like, but not de mots fléchis, verbes, adjectifs, pronoms, noms, etc., mais adverbs, particles, prepositions, etc. non les adverbes, particules, prépositions ou autres. a critical rule can, but need not be used for une règle critique peut se trouver mobilisée pour des besoins communicative purposes, that is, r could be checked de communication, mais ce n’est pas toujours le cas: r peut for without ever showing up in the learner’s être vérifiée et confirmée sans apparaître dans les productions production de l’apprenant Table 4.29 Intensional/explicative that is in English vs. zero in French that is zero connector One of the rare attempts to investigate pronouns as Selon la seule étude jusqu’ici qui envisage explicitement anaphoric and deictic devices (Klein 1981; Klein et Rieck la fonction anaphorique (et déictique) des pronoms 1982), la fonction anaphorique joue apparemment un rôle (Klein 1981; Klein and Rieck 1982) suggests that in early très restreint dans les systèmes élémentaires d’apprenants: learner varieties the role of anaphora is negligible, that l’apprenant renonce dans un premier temps à reprendre is, the beginning learner avoids using pronouns in explicitement des informations préalables. reference to preceding information. Table 4.30 Extensional that is vs. à saυoir that is à savoir I could therefore incarnate what for him is the ideal Je pourrais donc incarner ce qui est pour lui l’auteur idéal: author, that is, the author who is dissolved in the cloud of à savoir, l’auteur qui se dissout dans le nuage de fictions fictions that covers the world with its thick sheath. qui, de son voile épais, recouvre le monde.

< previous page

page_179

next page >

< previous page

page_180

next page >

Page 180 Table 4.31 that is vs. en d’autres termes that is en d’autres termes Any language associates particular sound patterns Toute langue associe des suites sonores données à des with particular meanings, that is, has a vocabulary… éléments de sens, en d’autres termes possède un lexique… The ‘principle of natural order’ does not apply to L’énoncé (13) s’écarte nettement du ‘principe de l’ordre naturel’; utterance (m): the recounted event is clearly timed l’événement auquel ce segment réfère se situe sans aucun prior to the event mentioned in (le), since it is the doute possible avant l’événement exprimé en (12) puisqu’il accident itself. That is to say, the insertion of s’agit de l’accident lui-même. En d’autres termes, l’introduction derivative utterance time together with quoted de moments d’énonciation dérivés auxquels s’ancrent des speech overcomes the constraints imposed by PNO. paroles rapportées permet de renverser le PON tout naturellement. Table 4.32 that is vs. justement that is justement In later societies the memory of the way in which food Le souvenir de la manière dont a été obtenue la nourriture, was originally gained, that is, through transformation, is par métamorphose justement, forme encore le contenu de still preserved in sacred communions. certaines communions sacrales tardives. Table 4.33 that is vs. et plus exactement that is et plus exactement but though war is usually a matter for men, Mais bien que la guerre soit en général l’affaire des hommes, et plus that is, for free men… exactement des hommes libres… extensional/denominative (i.e. co-referential) function, as suggested by the interchangeability of that is and in other words with regard to this function. It may also translate intensional that is when this has scope over an extended text span and signals an inference (see Table 4.31). This brings us to some of the less common equivalents of that is. When that is resumes a word already mentioned in the previous context, postposed justement may be used as a French translation equivalent (see Table 4.32). When that is introduces a correction, a gradational reformulator such as et plus exactement may replace c’est-à-dire in French (see Table 4.33; on gradational reformulators, see Section 4.2.3). There is also a specific mode of that is, more common in speech than in writing, in which it is postposed. This mode is not really reformulatory, though; rather, it indicates that the second appositive restricts the validity or relevance of the first. This mode can be rendered by en tout cas, du

< previous page

page_180

next page >

< previous page

page_181

next page >

Page 181 Table 4.34 that is vs. en tout cas that is en tout cas Jens was a charming sight as he walked up the quiet Et c’est d’ailleurs le tableau touchant qu’offrait Stig-Ole qui garden path to the house—until Nero picked up his remontait l’allée paisible du jardin, en tout cas jusqu’à ce que scent, that is. Néron le flaire. Table 4.35 that i s in English vs. syntactic rearrangement in French that is Different syntax on Friday morning he succeeded, by using ‘the il se vanta d’ailleurs par la suite…d’avoir réussi le vendredi matin à simplest trick in the book, the workman trick’, s’introduire au chevet de Mme Blum grâce au plus simple de tous that is, by getting hold of some overalls, a paint les stratagèmes, celui consistant à se faire passer pour un artisan pot and a paint brush… au travail dans les lieux with both money and objects he engulfs men, de cet argent et de ces objets il couvre les hommes jusqu’à les that is, wins them over it may also be the other avoir gagnés il se peut, inversement, qu’il interprète… way round, that is, he may misinterpret… Table 4.36 Frequency of French equivalents of i.e. in MTC French equiυalents ofi.e. Number of occurrences in MTC c’est-à-dire 16 zero connector 6 ou/ou tout au moins 3 par exemple 2 donc 1 disons pour être bref 1 syntactic devices 9 moins, enfin and similar expressions (see Table 4.34). The ‘IRA’ example quoted on p. 150 also falls into this category. It is also noteworthy that a number of other syntactic devices may be used to render the meaning of that is more elegantly with a view to maintaining the smooth flow of the French sentence. At the broadest level, such translation shifts may be ascribed to a greater desire for elegance, precision and brevity in French prose (cf. Grünbeck 1976). One of the commonest procedures is to resort to a participial relative clause rather than a literal rendering by c’est-àdire, as in the first of the examples shown in Table 4.35. Other divergences are syntactic. One is the fact, already discussed on p. 150, that pronominal substitution is the rule in English, as opposed to French, when the clause following that is/c’est-à-dire begins with the same subject as the preceding clause.

< previous page

page_181

next page >

< previous page

page_182

next page >

Page 182 This brings us to English i.e. The discussion in the preceding section suggests that i.e. generally corresponds to c’està-dire. This is substantiated by the results for the multilingual corpus, although i.e. occurs with only moderate frequency in this corpus (see Table 4.36). Table 4.37 gives a prototypical example of the rendition of i.e. by c’est-à-dire. This example also illustrates the important syntactic divergence, already discussed above, between English i.e. (or that is) and French c’est-à-dire. As noted there, the latter may introduce substitutions of particular constituents embedded within a noun phrase. In this case the substitution (de langues maternelles…) is realized as an extension of the noun phrase (des créoks) . By way of contrast, the reformulator i.e. is rarely followed by an of -phrase in contemporary English. Close examination of the multilingual corpus revealed that in cases where i.e. introduces lists of examples or a clarification (rather than a fully fledged definition), it is usually equivalent to the zero connector in French. This parallels the above findings for that is (see Table 4.38). From what was said in the monolingual section above, it can be inferred that the mode in which i.e. can be glossed as ‘which here means’, often restricting the scope of the first appositive, may be gracefully rendered by c’est-à-dire en l’occurrence; unfortunately, there are no examples of Table 4.37 i.e . and c’est-à-dire i.e. c’est-à-dire Its functioning is most clearly displayed in the Son fonctionnement est mis en évidence de la façon la plus claire creation of creoles, i.e. native languages derived par la formation des créoles, c’est-à-dire de langues maternelles from pidgins dérivées des pidgins Table 4.38 i.e . in English vs. zero connector in French i.e. zero connector Moreover, ordinary conversation within any community is Enfin, les interactions dans une communauté sociale sont dominated by ritual conversation patterns, i.e. by fortement déterminées par des échanges verbaux standard phrases, routine expressions, figures of speech, ritualisées, par des expressions stéréotypées et des but also by a delicate balance of explicitness and formules figées, par un équilibre délicat entre le sérieux et implicitness, direct and indirect speech acts, and the like. la dérision, entre des actes de parole directs et indirects, etc. the origo, i.e. ‘I-here-now’ of the speaker l’origo, ou source énonciative (le moi-ici-maintenant du locuteur) The term ‘foreign language’ is used to denote a language On désigné par ‘langue étrangère’ une langue qui est acquired in a milieu where it is not normally in use (i.e. apprise en dehors de son aire d’usage habituelle—en usually through instruction)… general en classe de langue—…

< previous page

page_182

next page >

< previous page

page_183

Page 183 Table 4.39 Le. vs. c’est-à-dire en l’occurrence i.e. Newly independent countries were advised to…limit capitalist exploitation (i.e. foreign investment).

next page > c’est-à-dire en l’occurrence On conseilla aux pays nouvellement indépendants…de limiter l’exploitation capitaliste, c’est-à-dire en l’occurrence les investissements étrangers. (my translation)

Table 4.40 Frequency of French equivalents of namely in MTC French equiυalents of namely Number of occurrences in MTC zero connector 16 (à) saυoir 3 ou 1 justement 1 soit 1 c’est-à-dire 1 par exemple 1 notamment 1 syntactic devices 7 this in the multilingual corpus, so that a translated example will serve to illustrate what is meant (see Table 4.39). We now turn to English namely . The results for namely linking two phrases are highly significant in the sense that its dictionary equivalent à saυoir is by no means the most frequent equivalent in the multilingual corpus. At a mere three occurrences, it is clearly outdistanced by the zero connector, which is found 16 times (see Table 4.40). Let us now look at a few examples of namely translated by the zero connector; note that the zero connector may be introduced by a dash, a comma or, more rarely, a colon (see Table 4.41). Although à saυoir could be substituted for zero in these examples without rendering the sentences unacceptable, the translators’ choices suggest that its use would be significantly less idiomatic. In the multilingual corpus namely is sometimes translated as notamment; this suggests that it may sometimes come close to especially in function, a shade of meaning that has so far gone unrecorded in the monolingual dictionaries (see Table 4.42). Let us now consider some other equivalence relations. An intriguing relation holds between namely and the resumer justement (see Table 4.43). Turning now to an example of different syntactic realizations, we note that the syntagma introduced by namely (and also that is) in English is often realized as a participial relative clause in French (see Table 4.44). It goes without saying that, in their extensional/quantificational mode,

< previous page

page_183

next page >

< previous page

page_184

Page 184 Table 4.41 namely vs. zero connector namely They were carried out by forces assembled from an occupying army representing an organized state, namely Turkey, with which this Community and this Parliament have relations and various dealings. Third, the USA which the Commission often quotes as a model cannot be a model for Europe. It is precisely in the USA that the liberalization of passenger transport has led to the monopoly of a single undertaking, namely Amtrak. It is not at all clear why learners tend to neglect anaphora as an important syntactic device for so long, relying instead—contrary to the norms of the target language—on two other devices, namely repetition and ellipsis.

Table 4.42 namely vs. notamment namely First, emphasis should be given to the decisive role that tourism could play in favour of economic and social cohesion and especially employment in latedeveloping regions, namely the ultra-peripheral and insular regions, whose assets are indisputable.

zero connector Ils l’ont été par les forces régulières d’une armée d’occupation représentant un Etat organise—l’Etat turc—avec lequel la Communauté et notre Parlement entretiennent des échanges, des rapports. Troisièmement, l’exemple américain cité par la Commission ne peut servir d’exemple pour l’Europe. En effet, la libéralisation dans le domaine du transport de voyageurs a mené au monopole d’une seule société, Amtrak. Il est difficile de s’expliquer pourquoi l’apprenant accorde pendant longtemps si peu d’importance aux anaphoriques, composante centrale du discours, et se repose, bien au-delà de ce que la langue cible tolère, sur deux autres moyens, la répétition simple et l’ellipse.

notamment En premier lieu, il faut insister sur le rôle décisif que peut jouer le tourisme en faveur de la cohésion économique et sociale et, en particulier, de l’emploi, dans les régions en retard de développement, notamment les regions ultrapériphériques et insulaires, dont les atouts sont incontestables.

Table 4.43 namely vs. justement namely The centre of their life, what they had above all to keep secret, namely the act of castration, they called ‘the making-white’.

< previous page

next page >

justement Le centre de leur vie est ce qu’ils doivent tenir le plus secret, la castration justement qu’ils appellent le blanchiment.

page_184

next page >

< previous page

page_185

next page >

Page 185 Table 4.44 namely vs. syntactic device namely syntactic device Then there are some parts of the central nervous system, Viennent ensuite des aspects du système nerveux namely those dealing with perception, memory, and the central, liés à la perception, à la mémoire, aux fonctions higher cognitive functions. cognitives supérieures Table 4.45 namely that vs. colon namely that colon In the following sections we discuss briefly two crucial Notons brièvement les deux caractéristiques characteristics of spontaneous second language acquisition, définitoires de l’ALE non guidée : elle se produit 1) namely that it (a) takes place in the course of everyday par l’intermédiaire de la communication communication, and (b) is free from any systematic and quotidienne; 2) sans efforts intentionnels intentional intervention systématiques Table 4.46 that -clause vs. à saυoir que that-clause à savoir que The Bolshevik policy of national preference, La politique bolchévique des nationalités, appliquée par tentatively carried out from 1922, rested on the tâtonnements a partir de 1922, reposait sur un postulat: à savoir postulate that separatist tendencies among the que les tendances séparatistes des allogènes disparaîtraient population would automatically disappear after the d’elles-mêmes après l’abolition des inégalités caractéristiques du abolition of inequalities which had arisen under the pouvoir tsariste, même si des peuples dépourvus d’un prolétariat Tzarist regime…(my translation) urbain inspiraient la méfiance. to wit and namely may be rendered by soit, although no examples of this equivalence can be located in the multilingual corpus. Let us now move on to the inter-clausal mode of namely and à saυoir. Here too it turns out that, since à saυoir que is comparatively rare in contemporary French prose, the zero connector is an apter translation for namely that at the head of non-restrictive appositive clauses, with the link usually being made by a colon (see Table 4.45). When the appositive clause clearly depends on the last noun that precedes it à saυoir que appears to be a more likely choice, but in such cases English can normally dispense with namely that . There is no example of this in the corpus, but Table 4.46 presents a translated example.

< previous page

page_185

next page >

< previous page

page_186

next page >

Page 186 Let us now consider what happens when translation is carried out in the opposite direction. Table 4.47 shows the results for c’est-à-dire. It will be seen from Table 4.47 that the zero connector is a moderately common rendition of c’est-à-dire. It occurs mainly in the translation of bracketed or ‘dashed’ glosses, as shown in Table 4.48. Or and or rather can serve a similar function, although the first of the translations given in Table 4.49 might be queried. Intensional/connotative c’est-à-dire may be rendered more explicitly by and, indirectly, as shown in Table 4.50. As discussed in the monolingual section, extensional/specificative c’est-à-dire may sometimes play an exemplificatory role. In this mode, an exemplifier such as for example, as when, as in, etc. may be substituted for it in English (see Table 4.51). Table 4.47 Frequency of English equivalents of c’est-à-dire in MTC English equivalents of c’est-à-dire Number of occurrences in MTC zero connector 7 that is 50 i.e. 16 meaning/by which I mean/and we mean by this/which means that 4 or 3 or rather 1 such as 2 in particular/as when 2 and, indirectly 1 S0 1 in other words/to put it another way 2 syntactic devices 17 Table 4.48 c’est-à-dire vs. zero connector c’est-à-dire zero connector Il est prouvé qu’au même moment—c’est-à-dire vers midi—… It is known that at about this time—around noon—… Table 4.49 c’est-à-dire vs. or c’est-à-dire or Les déictiques personnels, c’est-à-dire les mots comme moi Personal deixis, or words like ‘I’ Malheureusement le singe, c’est-à-dire Unfortunately the ape, or rather Buster, lui tournait le dos Buster, had his back to Mr Olsen

< previous page

page_186

next page >

< previous page

page_187

next page >

Page 187 Table 4.50 c’est-à-dire vs. and, indirectly c’est-à-dire and, indirectly Cependant, ces processus peuvent être contrôlées The ‘learning’ (and, indirectly, teaching) in which the consciemment et influences dans une certaine mesure par learner is involved exerts, to a certain extent, a l’apprentissage’, c’est-à-dire aussi par l’enseignement. controlling influence upon the ‘acquisition’ of the language. Table 4.51 c’est-à-dire vs. as when c’est-à-dire as when Nous ne nous arrêterons pas non plus sur les analyses erronées, c’est- We will likewise ignore erroneous analyses, as à-dire les cas où l’apprenant… when the learner… Table 4.52 c’est-à-dire vs. participial relative clause c’est-à-dire participial relatiυe clause En effet, le cadre biologique, c’est-à-dire la capacité auditive, la The biological endowment consisting of our hearing, mémoire, etc…. memory, etc. Table 4.53 c’est-à-dire vs. syntactic device c’est-à-dire syntactic deυice la distribution se déroule innocemment, c’est-à-dire as distribution is settled in good faith and publicly publiquement l’ordre est ici une sentence de mort, c’est-à-dire très The command he receives contains his own death sentence and proche de son origine biologique is thus very close to its biological origin In a very few cases a procedure already noted for the other translation direction is used, namely the participial relative clause, but this is much less frequent in French-English translation than vice versa (see Table 4.52). Another type of procedure allows the translator to substitute an English coordinate structure for the French subordinate structure introduced by c’est-à-dire (see Table 4.53). What little data is available for à saυoir suggests that the zero connector is a moderately common rendition of this device. The conditions for its

< previous page

page_187

next page >

< previous page

page_188

next page >

Page 188 use appear to be the same as those for namely or υiz . in their announcing functions. Compare the examples cited in Table 4.54, where namely or υiz . might equally well serve as translation equivalents. In other words (etc.) vs. en d’autres termes (etc.) This group of reformulators poses few serious difficulties, as English and French are almost fully congruent in this area. However, monolingual frequency counts suggest that en d’autres termes cannot be the only translational equivalent of in other words . One reason for this is that in other words has a wider range of uses than en d’autres termes; in particular, the former has an extensional mode not paralleled by the latter. Another reason is that some of the modes of in other words are not strictly of the order of reformulation. Analysis of the multilingual corpus throws up the potential equivalents shown in Table 4.55. These results confirm our intuitions about in other words . Let us now look in greater detail at some alternative translations of in other words . En somme, bref and en bref suggest themselves as viable equivalents in cases where in other words follows an accumulation of identically structured clauses or clause constituents and/or has strong overtones of a concluder (intensional/connotative mode); similar considerations are valid for donc and ainsi (see Table 4.56). Table 4.54 à saυoir vs. zero connector à savoir zero connector Il fallut encore interroger trois autres personnes qui avaient participé à There were three further guests to be cette soirée, à savoir Konrad Beiters… interrogated: Konrad Beiters… Table 4.55 Frequency of French equivalents of in other words (etc.) in MTC French equiυalents of in other words/ to put it another way/etc. Number of occurrences in MTC en d’autres termes/autrement dit (etc.) 14 en somme/(en) bref 7 donc/ainsi 4 zero connector 4 soit 1 c’est-à-dire 2 ce qui signifie que 1 other devices 2

< previous page

page_188

next page >

< previous page

page_189

next page >

Page 189 Table 4.56 in other words vs. en somme, donc etc. in other words en somme, donc (etc.) In fact, looking in perspective at everything I am Et même, si je regarde en perspective l’ensemble de ce que je leaving out of the main narration, I see something laisse en dehors de la narration principale, je vois comme une like a forest that extends in all directions and is so forêt qui s’étend de tous les côtés et ne laisse pas passer la thick that it doesn’t allow light to pass: a material, in lumière, tellement elle est épaisse, une matière en somme other words. much richer than what I have chosen to beaucoup plus riche que ce que j’ai cette fois choisi de mettre put in the foreground this time… au premier plan… Learners tend to overuse ellipsis (…) A pertinent Les apprenants (…) recourent à l’ellipse d’une façon qui example is the by now well-known request, ‘Me excède de beaucoup les possibilités offertes par la langue cible bread’, uttered in a bakery. While perfectly in order (…). A titre d’exemple, des énoncés comme (1) ci-dessus ‘Moi when uttered in response to a specific question (What un pain’ dans la boulangerie, qui peuvent être parfaitement would you like to have?), this construction is also corrects en réponse à une question donnée (‘Et pour vous, used in the absence of the contextual Monsieur, ce sera?’), sont utilisés en l’absence des presuppositions. It should be noted that, even so, présuppositions contextuelles requises (…). Notons que, dans communication is possible, in view of the overriding ce même cas, la communication reste possible, vu l’importance importance of the concomitant world and situational décisive des connaissances du monde et des informations knowledge. In other words. the learner can afford to situationnelles: l’apprenant peut donc se permettre de violer violate the ellipsis rules of the language. les règles d’usage de l’ellipse. Table 4.57 in other words vs. soit in other words soit in the year 2006, in other words in ten years’ time en 2006, soit dans dix ans In its extensional/quantificational mode, in other words indicates the substitutive character of a figure or amount; in this mode soit appears to be its most natural equivalent (see Table 4.57). As shown above, pure reformulation is sometimes expressed tacitly in French, so that the zero connector, often occurring together with a colon, is another potential equivalent of in other words (see Table 4.58). When intensional in other words introduces an interpretation of what precedes, rather in the way that the inferrer this/which means that does, French SLDMs such as ce qui reυient à dire que, ce qui signifie que, ce qui υeut dire que, autant dire que, c’est (à) dire que can act as potential equivalents. In less formal French, ça fait comme fulfils the same function (see Table 4.59).

< previous page

page_189

next page >

< previous page

page_190

Page 190 Table 4.58 in other words vs. zero connector+colon in other words In its extreme form the identity hypothesis asserts that it is irrelevant for language acquisition whether or not any other language has been learned before; in other words, first and second language learning is basically one and the same process governed by the same laws

next page > zero connector+colon Cette hypothèse, sous sa forme la plus radicale, affirme qu’il est indifférent pour l’acquisition qu’une première langue ait déjà été acquise : l’ALE et l’ALM suivent les mêmes principes.

Table 4.59 Various French renditions of in other words in other words ce qui revient a dire que (etc.) He still acts on behalf of Lüstra and Haftex but no Sans doute Blorna travaille-t-il encore quelque peu pour la Lüstra longer at the international or even the national et la Haftex, non plus à l’échelon international ni même national, level, only rarely at the regional and mostly at the mais seulement à l’échelon parfois régional et le plus souvent local level. In other words, he has to grapple with local, ce qui signifie qu’il en est réduit à se battre contre de petty defaulters and troublemakers… minables plaideurs en rupture perpétuelle de contrat… in other words, there is a veil… ça fait comme un voile Table 4.60 Frequency of English equivalents of en d’autres termes/autrement dit English equiυalents of en d’autres termes/ autrement dit (etc.) Number of occurrences in MTC that is 7 in other words 14 zero connector 1 syntactic devices 1 A look at the other translation direction confirms the above findings on that is and in other words. En d’autres termes and its variants rarely have equivalents different from in other words and extensional/denominative that is (see Table 4.60). Lastly, let us look at French soit. There is a variant of the quantificational mode in which soit indicates that the writer is about to provide additional, more accurate information. This mode must be rendered by i.e. (see Table 4.61). In sentence-initial position, soit cannot be rendered by an English refor-

< previous page

page_190

next page >

< previous page

page_191

next page >

Page 191 Table 4.61 i.e . vs. soit i.e. soit The Thai government only grants Chinese citizenship to Les Thaïlandais ne reconnaissent la nationalité chinoise ‘Chinese nationals’, i.e. 460,000 individuals, whereas the qu’aux «Chinois nationaux», soit à 460000 individus, Chinese themselves put their numbers at 3 million. (my tandis que les Chinois eux-mêmes estiment être 3 translation) millions. (CAF) Table 4.62 all in all vs. soit all in all soit the cable channel broadcasts non-stop a variety of films la chaîne câblée diffuse en continu une sélection de films which it has co-produced; all in all, around forty auxquels elle a participé en coproduction. Soit une productions on such diverse subjects as society, history, quarantaine d’œuvres abordant les thèmes les plus variés: culture, science and music. (my translation) société, histoire, culture, sciences, musique ... Table 4.63 dash vs. soit dash soit The server, featuring an international database, boasts Le serveur, fort de sa base de données internationale, 70,000 job offers—an interesting selection for those who annonce 70000 offres d’emploi. Soit un choix intéressant wish to leave the country. (my translation) pour tous ceux qui souhaitent s’expatrier. mulator; the translator may use the zero connector or the concluder all in all instead (see Table 4.62). The same holds true for the intensional/connotative mode in which soit serves to introduce an appended explanation of what precedes or an inference to be drawn from it; in English this kind of link is usually made by a dash functioning as a tacit connector (see Table 4.63). also called vs. encore appelé It is relatively unproblematic, at first sight, to set up equivalences between the potential citation forms of these SLDMs, namely also called and encore appelé, as well as between their variants sometimes called/parfois appelé, commonly referred to as/couramment appelé, then called/alors nommé, preυiously known as (or: anciently known as)/anciennement nommé, locally called/appelé localement, officially called/officiellement appelé, etc. But even here there are a

< previous page

page_191

next page >

< previous page

page_192

next page >

Page 192 few stumbling blocks in the way of translation; these were identified by comparison of the monolingual corpora, as the multilingual corpus offered no examples. Thus, the pure reformulator désormais may be used in a historical recount in a mode different from English henceforth or hereafter: L’intervention directe du pouvoir impérial au début de Meiji crée les conditions d’un art délibérément «laïque» intégré dans les «beaux-arts», désormais appelé «sculpture» et distinct de l’artisanat. L’Italien Vincenzo Ragusa (1841– 1924) est appelé à enseigner les techniques occidentales dans le département de sculpture de l’École polytechnique des beaux-arts créée en 1876: modelage, plâtre, fonte en bronze. In the present case, the natural equivalence would probably be subsequently called/thereafter called. Likewise υariously called finds only a partial equivalent in diυersement nommé and diυersement désigné sous le nom de, for, unlike υariously called, the French devices usually introduce more than two alternative designations. Another dissimilarity between English and French usage is that the link of thought made by for short in its purely reformulatory function usually remains tacit in French, which uses parentheses or dashes instead. Pour faire court is only a partial equivalent in that it may introduce rewordings, but not abbreviations. En abrégé is another potential translation equivalent, but it is used less frequently than English for short. La Confédération générale du travail (C.G.T.) est née à Limoges en 1895. (CAF) l’Organisation du Traité de l’Atlantique Nord=OTAN=qui complète et renforce l’alliance mais s’en distingue. (CAF) On ne peut donc que saluer la parution du Dictionnaire suisse romand (en abrégé, DSR). qui constitue un saut qualitatif par rapport aux ouvrages pseudo-scientifiques qui ont ‘sévi’ sur le marché suisse ces dernières décennies. (CAF) With reformulators of the type in plain English, the focus of attention turns to collocational difference. English bases this kind of collocation on the adjectives plain and ordinary rather than good; the latter is usually reserved for judgements of the facility with which non-native speakers use the language. It is hardly an exaggeration to say that these preferred ways of putting things reflect prevalent thinking on language among the elites of the linguacultures in question—the English with their predilection for pragmatism and simplicity, the French with their insistence on correct, gallicized usage. Therefore it is probably not an accident that in plain

< previous page

page_192

next page >

< previous page

page_193

next page >

Page 193 English also finds an equivalent in plus simplement appelé . Contrast the following: According to a programme note, this means that they have moved to ‘a much more integrated process wherein everyone connected with important decisions has a voice’. In plain English there has been a muddle…(NE) What Granny says is full of falsehoods; in ordinary English, lies. (NE) Mieux vaudrait parfois perdre une élection que son savoir-vivre. Ou, en français moderne, que ses boulons. (NF) Le common rail, en bon français ‘rampe commune’, procède de l’application d’une technique d’injection du carburant. (CAF) Subtle yet significant differences in functionality exist between French ou and English or . In the purely reformulatory co-referential mode, ou functions like English also called (note that English or would not be the most obvious equivalent here, since it is usually followed by a simpler rather than just an alternative wording): le «tableau périodique», ou «tableau de Mendeleïev» (CAF) In the second, intensional mode discussed above, ou functions as an interlingual equivalent of that is: la paratextualité, ou relation que le texte entretient avec son environnement (CAF) In its third mode, it is roughly equivalent to ‘which is or are’ and is often rendered in English by namely; as already mentioned, French also offers a more elegant option to express this function—namely, constructions of the type ce cancer social qu’est l’exclusion (Gallagher 2000). Thus, the example shown in Table 4.64 may be rephrased as la consommation de l’acte qu ‘est la lecture du liυre . A rendition of the above construction by namely is barred when the Table 4.64 namely vs. ou namely ou the consummation of the act, namely the reading of the book la consommation de l’acte, ou la lecture du livre

< previous page

page_193

next page >

< previous page

page_194

next page >

Page 194 Table 4.65 French constructions of the type ce cancer social qu’est l’exclusion (cf. Gallagher 2000) NP +of+ proper name NP +que+être+proper name that great man of science Albert Einstein cette sommité des sciences qu’est Albert Einstein Table 4.66 or vs. soit or soit Only 11, or 18% of the doctors knew the Seuls 11 (soit 18%) des médecins savaient la bonne réponse. (my answer. translation) demonstrative pronoun that is used, as in the made-up example given in Table 4.65. The quantificational mode, in which or marks the substitutive character of a figure or amount, is matched in French by soit (see Table 4.66). 4.2.2.5 Conclusion This corpus-driven enquiry has provided ample proof of the inadequate treatment so far accorded to pure reformulators in dictionaries and text-books of composition or translation. It has allowed us to add a number of important items to the field, notably the zero connector and the French reformulators en abrégé and traduisez; it has also helped to refine our understanding of the great variety of contextual uses of pure reformulators. The zero connector has been shown to perform several important functions which have tended to go unnoticed in monolingual analysis. In all three languages the zero connector may, for example, introduce a bracketed translation, as in the following English example: Browning repeats the desire of Gluck’s Euridice for ‘un sguardo solo [a single look],’ Comparison of monolingual results has proved to be an equally useful heuristic. In particular, it has allowed the detection of subtle differences between seemingly straightforward translation equivalents such as or and ou, or désormais and henceforth . The combination of monolingual and multilingual approaches has shown that French possesses a more subtly differentiated set of pure reformulators, with a large number of different items serving functions performed by a smaller number of English equivalents. This tallies with

< previous page

page_194

next page >

< previous page

page_195

next page >

Page 195 evidence presented in the previous chapter suggesting that French text exhibits greater surface connectivity based on marker use than English or German text. 4.2.3 Gradational reformulators Gradational reformulators mark the addition or substitution of a more accurate, more explicit or more emphatic form of words. More formally stated, if the first appositive x leads to the conclusion x’, then the second appositive y reinforces x’ . In the following French example the noun fanatisme goes one better than fondamentalisme, thus underscoring the heretical nature of belief in the divinity of one person in the given context: Dans un tel contexte, annoncer la foi en la divinité d’un seul homme passerait presque pour un signe de ‘fondamentalisme’, voire de ‘fanatisme’. (CAF) Gradational reformulators usually link two words of the same class or two identically structured syntagmas. Table 4.67 provides an overview of the category. As Table 4.67 indicates, the similarities between the languages under survey outweigh the differences to such an extent that we can dispense with monolingual investigations and proceed immediately to interlingual comparisons. not to say, pour ne pas dire, um nicht zu sagen These three items are exact syntactic and semantic equivalents, usually suggesting that a stronger term could have been used to describe a particular situation. As far as their pragmatics are concerned, there is a certain tendency in English for the second appositive to carry ironic over-tones, as illustrated in Table 4.68; this happens less frequently in the other two languages. It can also be seen from the examples that in all three languages the items most commonly co-occur with nouns or adjectives. if not, (or) eυen vs. υoire, sinon vs. ja (sogar), wenn nicht (gar) With these items, things are more complex. An examination of the syntactic embedding of these words shows that there is not much difference between the languages under survey, with the exception that, like the pure reformulator c’est-à-dire, υoire may introduce substitutions not only of an entire preceding syntagma but also of particular constituents thereof: Dans un tel contexte, annoncer la foi en la divinité d’un seul homme passerait presque pour un signe de ‘fondamentalisme’, voire de ‘fanatisme’. (CAF)

< previous page

page_195

next page >

< previous page Page 196 Table 4.67 Gradational reformulators in English, English not to say if not (indeed) or should I/we say (or/and) even and possibly even nay

or rather or better (still) (or) indeed or more correctly more accurately or more properly (to put it) more precisely to be precise/exact to be more precise to put it another (and better) way

page_196 French and German French pour ne pas dire voire que dis-je sinon si ce n’est à la vérité disons même disons le mot allons plus loin (ou) plutôt disons plutôt ou je dirais plutôt (ou) mieux ou pour mieux dire pour mieux parler ou, disons mieux, il vaudrait mieux dire pour être plus précis (et/ou) plus précisément (et/ou) plus exactement (et/ou/mais) plus spécifiquement si l’on veut si l’on préfère

next page > German um nicht zu sagen gar ja (sogar) wenn nicht (so)gar mehr noch oder sollte man sagen oder muß es heißen

(oder) besser gesagt genauer gesagt genauer gesprochen oder, sprachwissenschaftlich exakter: genauer(, Stilbruch) beziehungsweise genauer oder, eingeschränkter gesagt, oder korrekter formuliert präziser formuliert

if you like if you will if you prefer better (best) described/ known as more properly plus exactement appelé besser bekannt als named In such cases English and German would take up only the noun rather than the entire genitive phrase. Notice that if the first part of such syntagmas undergoes substitution, the demonstrative pronoun celui must be used: repousser très longtemps l’heure du vieillissement, voire celle de la mort (CAF) Grieve (1996) deduces from manually collected evidence of υoire that the two terms linked by the reformulator are usually the same word class. This intuition can account for a large number of instances in all three languages under discussion, such as those shown in Table 4.69. But not all possible cases can be accounted for in this way. We need to sharpen Grieve’s intuitive rule by substituting ‘phrase’ for ‘words’: it is the

< previous page

page_196

next page >

< previous page

page_197

next page >

Page 197 Table 4.68 not to say, pour ne pas dire and um nicht zu sagen English French German An exhaustive (not to say Le petit immeuble excentré, pour ne pas dire exile, au fondDiese Missa hatte nichts von exhausting) list of rules de la Défense, ne sera bientôt plus qu’un souvenir dans la sakraler Entrücktheit und and examples appears in mémoire du fabricant d’aluminium. klerikaler (um nicht zu sagen The Chicago Manual of pontifikaler) Menschenferne an Style. sich. The sport has all the L’habileté (pour ne pas dire l’escroquerie) de Pierre sera deSie aber treffen eine drama, not to say onefaire d’abord payer au Saint-Synode (direction de l’église) Vorauswahl—um nicht zu dimensional monotony, of les réparations et l’entretien d’un bâtiment sur lequel il n’a sagen: Zensur, indem sie a child’s computer game. aucun pouvoir et qui ne sert qu’à soigner les soldats! entscheiden, was gekauft wird. Table 4.69 if not, υoire and wenn nicht gar English French German Finally, on to Gucci, without doubt Et quand on se montre impuissant à imaginerdie Widersprüche, wenn nicht gar the week’s (if not the season’s) l’avenir autrement que comme une répétition die politische Sinnleere des Vertrags hottest ticket. du passé, une von Maastricht restauration, voire une réaction. phrases linked by gradational reformulators which usually belong to the same category (verb phrase, noun phrase, prepositional phrase, adverb phrase, etc.). This new rule can account for the French cases discussed above and for such examples as those shown in Table 4.70. There are two additional points to be made here. The first is that English if not, in its reformulatory function, cannot normally be placed in front of prepositional phrases. It would then take on a purely negational meaning (see Friederich 1996), as in the following example: his Tim Nice-But-Dim character, an echo in manners, if not in words, of another England. (NE)

< previous page

page_197

next page >

< previous page

page_198

next page >

Page 198 Table 4.70 or eυen, if not, υoire, sinon, wenn nicht sogar and ja sogar English French German Why not last week, last month, last enrayer l’usage de la drogue comme geriete Pro Sieben in extreme finanzielle year or even in the year that he médium de corruption, voire comme Schwierigkeiten, wenn nicht (so)gar in was born? une veritable monnaie d’échange Konkurs The first evidence that direct mail Des présentoirs bien identifiables die Konzeption für ein shots can pursue you as far as the seront installés dans les hypermarchés, Vorgeschichtsmuseum vorgestellt, die— grave—if not actually beyond it— d’abord dans l’Ouest, puis dans toute la wenn die Einrichtung erst einmal da ist— emerged yesterday in a remote France en 1999, voire au-delà, selon bayernweit, wenn nicht (so)gar Essex village. les résultats. bundesweit Maßstäbe setzen wird. The same point can be made about verbal constructions. Contrast the following sentences, noting that if or eυen were replaced with if not, the meaning would change considerably, and that the negational meaning of if not, in its turn, translates into French as sinon (on the latter, see Ndiaye 1999): Meanwhile, the chlorine industry is worried that the EPA might curtail or even ban the production of chlorine and organochlorines. (→it is likely that the production of chlorine will be banned; French translation: υoire, sinon [même]; German translation: oder gar ) Meanwhile, the chlorine industry is worried that the EPA might curtail if not ban the production of chlorine and organochlorines. (→it is likely that the production of chlorine will be curtailed, but it will not be banned; French: sinon; German: wenn nicht gar ) In such cases, then, or eυen appears on first thought to be the only possible equivalent of υoire and wenn nicht, especially in academic texts. In newspaper language, though, another equivalent, nay, discounted by Grieve (1996:503) as archaic, still enjoys widespread currency, occurring with verbs, adjectives and nouns: But South Africa, in Durban, today, before 50,000 supporters who expect, nay demand, that their country reaches the final? (NE) There are pages and pages in different papers, all saying that Lord Cairns was the nicest man in the world nay, the nicest man in all history. (NE)

< previous page

page_198

next page >

< previous page

page_199

Page 199 Table 4.71 or even, υoire and oder gar English French In most cases local authorities Dans la plupart des cas, les keep their dominant position or autorités locales conservent leur even increase the pressures. (my position dominante, voire translation) accroissent leur pression.

next page > German Im Normalfall halten die örtlichen Behörden an ihrer beherrschenden Stellung fest oder erhöhen gar den Druck.

In den meisten Fällen halten die örtlichen Behörden an ihrer beherrschenden Stellung fest—wenn sie nicht gar den Druck erhöhen. (my translation) (Or) indeed and if not indeed are other possible English equivalents not recorded in Grieve (1996) and other dictionaries: we should think about the population and productivity growth of the developed world—or indeed of the world as a whole—rather than think about any particular country. (NE) Second, French υoire can also introduce combinations of verb and noun phrases, a feature which German can usually replicate only through changes in word order. This gives us the translation equivalents shown in Table 4.71. Note, however, that German can combine two successive verb and noun phrases using wenn gar nicht if the German sentence contains an auxiliary verb and two infinitives or a present perfect verb relating to two past participles, as in the following: In den meisten Ländern, inklusive des reichen Japan und der wohlhabenden Bundesrepublik, hat sie die nationale Filmproduktion an den Rand gedrückt, wenn nicht gänzlich, wie in Lateinamerika, zum Erliegen gebracht. (NG) Voire can also introduce a complement clause. This structure cannot be replicated in the two other languages simply by using English (or) eυen or German wenn nicht (gar) or sogar (see Table 4.72). It is interesting to note that this does not exhaust all the syntactic possibilities of French υoire; sometimes the second appositive may not be syntactically modelled on the first at all. Grieve adduces a somewhat dated counterexample from Proust’s A la recherche du temps perdu; closer to the present day, we find ample evidence in newspaper language:

< previous page

page_199

next page >

< previous page

page_200

next page >

Page 200 Table 4.72 eυen, υoire and sogar English French German The cinema is often in sync with what is Il est fréquent que le Häufig hält das Kino mit der gesellschaftlichen happening in the real world; it may cinéma soit en phase avec Entwicklung Schritt; es kann sogar in mehr oder even anticipate the course of history l’actualité, voire qu’il weniger bewußter Weise gesellschaftliche more or less consciously. (my l’anticipe plus ou moins Entwicklungen vorwegnehmen. (my translation) translation) consciemment. Table 4.73 if not actually, υoire carrément and wenn nicht sogar English French German The first evidence that direct mail La polémique a jeté une lumière crue Laut einer Studie von Hans Jürgens, shots can pursue you as far as the sur des vénérés artistes, dont certains Professor für Bevölkerungswissen-schaft grave—if not actually beyond it— ont affiché des prises de position an der Universität Kiel, ist die Darstellung emerged yesterday in a remote sexistes, voire carrément von alten Menschen oft negativ, wenn Essex village. (franchement) racistes. nicht sogar peinlich. On trouve désormais du vin dans des restaurants inattendus (chinois par exemple), voire accompagnant des sushis (boulettes de riz avec une lamelle de poisson cru). (NF) Apart from the lexicalized υoire même, to which one might add sinon même, Grieve is silent on typical collocations of υoire. The situation is similar in English and German dictionaries, where if not,ja sogar and wenn nicht are sometimes not even listed. English if not typically collocates with actually, whereas French υoire has strong collocates in carrément and its synonym franchement. These are matched respectively by wenn nicht (so)gar in German (see Table 4.73). If not more, or eυen more, υoire/sinon daυantage, υoire/sinon plus, wenn nicht mehr and oder sogar mehr are collocations designed to signal that the preceding statement is a conservative estimate; the second German example shows that the German structure can also be placed inside a noun phrase. Likewise, the common English collocation most, if not all can be literally rendered into German and French. Remarkably, though, the related phrase many, if not most has no standard equivalent in French—a rather unexpected collocational gap (see Table 4.75).

< previous page

page_200

next page >

< previous page

page_201

next page >

Page 201 Table 4.74 if not more, or even more, sinon plus, υoire daυantage and oder (so)gar mehr English French German he would find that most Elle a adopté, cette fois, un ton plus 79 Prozent haben einen tarifvertraglichen Ulster people deplore the détaché, plus abrupt pour cette histoire d’un Jahresurlaub von sechs Wochen oder sogar violence just as much as he homme enfermé dans sa tête d’homme mehr—in Ostdeutschland verfügen nur 33 does and I do, if not more autant, sinon plus. que dans sa cellule. Prozent über so viel Urlaub. it is conceivable that with l’Arabie saoudite est en discussion avec la Mit zunehmendem Alter steigen sie dann still more improved methods France pour des achats de chars de combat auf 15 bis 20 (entspricht vier bis fünf they might get eight Leclerc (quelque 300 exemplaires, voire Milligramm pro Liter) oder gar mehr hundredweight, or even davantage) Mikromol pro Liter an. more Table 4.75 most, if not all and similar collocations English French German For most, if not all, lung La plupart des billets de 1000 marks, sinon Subventionen und Unterstützungen werden cancers, the prognosis is (voire) la totalité sont des facsimiles de vielen, wenn nicht allen Sphären des usually dismal. monnaie-papier. Lebens gewährt. Many, if not most of these (?) Viele, wenn nicht gar die meisten university-based Erziehungswissenschaftler an educationists… Universitäten…(my translation) Further collocational gaps come to light when one tries to find equivalents for the French collocations υoire simplement and υoire…tout court. Neither English nor German can adequately render the meaning of these gradational reformulators by means of other gradational reformulators, as demonstrated in Table 4.76. Voire may be used to conclude lists of more than two elements; this is far less frequent, though not impossible, in English and German. It may be surmised that this divergence is due to a greater emphasis on stylistic elegance in French discursive and analytic prose (see Table 4.77). Sinon is a variant of υoire which is equivalent to if not and wenn nicht (gar). Just as if not collocates strongly with at least, so sinon and wenn nicht

< previous page

page_201

next page >

< previous page

page_202

next page >

Page 202 Table 4.76 υoire simplement and υoire…tout court with their English and German equivalents English French German the sum of regressive and shameful urges that make up his la somme de pulsions die Summe regressiver und ‘political identity’, or perhaps his whole identity (my régressives et schändlicher Triebe, die seine translation) that people are employable at a particular salary honteuses qui lui tient politische Identität, ja seine level or employable in the first place (my translation) for lieu d’identité politique, Identität schlechthin political or perhaps prestige reasons (my translation) voire d’identité tout begründen (my translation) court. que les gens soient dass die Leute zu einem ‘employables’ à un bestimmten Gehalt bzw. salaire donné, voire überhaupt arbeitsfähig sind employables tout court (my translation) Et pour des raisons Und das aus politischen politiques, voire Gründen, ja vielleicht sogar simplement de prestige nur aus Prestigegründen (my translation) Table 4.77 or eυen, υoire and ja sogar concluding a list English French German Applied research is also used, at this point, to turn On peut décrire, In diesen Zeiten werden Währungen a discovery, or invention, or even re-invention into recenser, voire innerhalb von Tagen, Wochen und Monaten a developed product or process that can be used. accuser les ‘réseaux um 10, 20, ja sogar 40 Prozent auf-und d’Allah’ abgewertet. Table 4.78 at least…if not, pour le moins…sinon and zumindest…wenn nicht English French German To export veal calves in La prestation de Harrison Ford, qui Während die europäischen Hersteller deutlich Fett crates and then import y interprète un president des Etats- angesetzt haben und sich genüßlich die fetten Leiber their delicate flesh is at Unis triomphant de tous les reiben können, ist bei den erfolgsgewohnten very least hypocritical, if dangers, était pour le moins japanischen Herstellern zumindest Sodbrennen, wenn not downright savage. approprié sinon symbolique. nicht Schlimmeres zu bemerken.

< previous page

page_202

next page >

< previous page

page_203

next page >

Page 203 Table 4.79 Gradational υoire and possible English equivalents French original English translation très difficile, voire impossible virtually impossible des centaines, voire des milliers hundreds and perhaps thousands co-occur significantly with pour le moins and zumindest, respectively (see Table 4.78). Ndiaye (1999) overlooks this gradational use of sinon, although he notes the corresponding negational use (sinon l’approbation du moins/au moins l’indulgence). The idea of gradation contained in υoire may also be expressed by other means in English and may lead to syntactic restructuring, as in Table 4.79. It could be argued that countervailing preferences among academics are discernible in such examples, preferences which have been found in other studies of cross-cultural difference. Whereas Anglo-Saxon academics and writers appear to be inclined towards academic modesty, preferring tentative hedges such as virtually and perhaps, their Romance counterparts seem more prone to overstatement by means of υoire . or rather vs. ou plutôt vs. oder besser gesagt Nominally, a distinction can be made between or rather and or better in the sense that or rather does not necessarily imply gradation, whereas or better, an SLDM that goes unrecorded in the dictionaries, almost invariably suggests that the second appositive constitutes a more appropriate wording. In other words, or rather is a hyperonym of or better. It is questionable, though, whether users of the language are aware of such subtle, and perhaps otiose, semantic niceties. In contrast with or rather, French ou plutôt and German oder besser gesagt, by virtue of their semantics, usually imply an element of gradation (see Table 4.80). In this area, too, French seems to allow greater lexical variation than either English or German. The only English variants I have been able to spot are or more properly, more correctly, more accurately and or should I/we/one say, which is interrogative in form and therefore requires special punctuation: The content of the past (or, more properly, the perfect aspect, after the evaluation of the problem of future contingency mentioned above) is at once the occasion for present change and shares the character of the hidden ground of causal necessity (CAE) When thinking of mirrors—or should I say, when reflecting on mirrors?—one mirror immediately comes to mind. (CAE) French variants abound, even if some are much less frequent than plutôt. Note that plutôt itself sometimes occurs without ou and that it may

< previous page

page_203

next page >

< previous page

page_204

next page >

Page 204 Table 4.80 or rather, ou plutôt and oder besser gesagt English French German Once Menoeceus has William part, ou plutôt hier geht es in der Tat um existenzielle Probleme, nämlich um fallen, or rather risen to fuit, sur le continent, die Frage, wie zwei rasch wachsende Völker auf äußerst heaven, Statius can profitant de l’offre qu’on begrenztem Raum und mit limitierten Ressourcen (vor allem complete the saga of lui fait d’y faire voyager un Wasser) zusammen—oder besser gesagt: nebeneinander— Capaneus: jeune lord. leben können. Public funds for public mais la mémoire s’est …reduziert sich das Problem der Naturbeherrschung auf die religion are now being estompée ou plutôt a été Frage, wie der organische und kognitive Phänotyp—oder regularly replaced, or bravée besser gesagt. wie Handeln und Wahrnehmen zusammen better. supplemented by hängen. private wealth. also come after the noun it modifies, although such postposition does not commonly occur in academic writing: Le troisième regard contourne les pièges de l’herméneutique classique et de la métaphore archéologique freudienne. Il renonce à sa quête du double sens, ou sens caché derrière le contenu manifeste. Hérésie! Plutôt stratégie de lecture par laquelle le regard voit dans le manifeste ce qui insiste: objet (fantasmatique) déplacé, insolite. (CAF) la cohorte de ses admirateurs (de ses admiratrices plutôt souvent très jeunes) est innombrable. (NF) As Grieve (1996) shows, à la υérité may serve as a variant of υoire or ou plutôt, rectifying a preceding statement and replacing it with the span of text lying to its right: Depuis la disparition du Général, la France se vendait mal. A la vérité, elle ne se vendait plus du tout, et l’on se demandait si elle se revendrait de nouveau. (Dutourd 1985:86, cited after Grieve 1996:39)

< previous page

page_204

next page >

< previous page

page_205

next page >

Page 205 The variants pour mieux dire, pour mieux parler, que dis-je, disons même, disons le mot and disons-le carrément only have moderate currency in contemporary French: Au temps de Cervantès, la Manche n’était qu’un hinterland, un lieu de passage ou, pour mieux dire, un ‘cul du monde’. (NF) Il avait donné l’ordre aux plantons en faction devant la lourde porte du palais présidentiel d’interdire par tout moyen approprié à quelque juge que ce soit, de mettre un pied, que dis-je, un orteil à l’intérieur de l’Elysée. (NF) n’ont jamais été d’accord et l’ont laissé corriger par les Allemands, disons même annuler. (NF) Mais celle-ci est plus âpre, plus austère, disons le mot: plus cérébrale (NF) à moins que ce ne soit une perle de culture willselfienne, un alcoolat maléfico-magique savamment distillé, et, disons-le carrément. une pantogamie littéraire probablement pantophobique (NF) if you will if you prefer vs. si l’on υeut/si je puis dire/si l’on peut dire vs. ja sogar. wenn man so will gleichsam These reformulators are somewhat different from other variants of or rather and its intralingual and interlingual equivalents, to the extent that they may imply a lesser degree of appropriateness or, as Grieve (1996:464) puts it, ‘a shade of courtesy’ on the part of the writer. Somewhat surprisingly, Grieve fails to notice that English has two direct equivalents for si l’on υeut—namely, if you will and if you like (see Table 4.81). Note that the ‘shade of courtesy’ touched upon by Grieve comes out quite clearly in the use of the apologetic phrase mit Verlaub in the first of the German example sentences in Table 4.81. Note also that the reformulation may sometimes precede the reformulator, often in a separate sentence: Certes, mais si la situation est grave, elle n’en est pas moins un peu comique. Ou tragi-comique si l’on préfère. (NF) Si l’on υeut and its interlingual equivalents may also be used to rephrase the gist of the preceding discourse in summary fashion: Au-delà de l’histoire d’un dauphin dans un bassin pourri qui affronte la liberté et ses dangers (conte initiatique si l’on veut) il y a une pédagogie ludique sur l’environnement. (NF)

< previous page

page_205

next page >

< previous page

page_206

next page >

Page 206 Table 4.81 if you will, if you prefer, si l’on υeut, si l’on préfère and wenn man so will English French German …register (sub-potentials Le mondial s’était enfin Das ist zum Lachen, ja sogar, mit Verlaub, zum characterized as registers and genres),trouvé une star juvénile, Schießen! text type (generalized instances—a set son Di Caprio si l’on veut. of texts if you will) ‘…what they say is the result of their La marche vers une Da allerdings das Sozialprodukt außerdem auch having penetrated (or if you prefer, Europe libérale, ou, si l’on durch die Inflation dieses Jahres wächst oder, wenn been penetrated by) another form of préfère, l’américanisation man so will, aufgebläht wird, ist dieser Satz noch life’ (1988:4) de l’Europe draufzurechnen. In Barcelona ist Alina Astafei Weltmeisterin geworden, Britta Bilac Zweite und Heike Henkel aus Leverkusen, die einzige, für die 1989 ein Jahr war wie jedes andere, Dritte. Drei Deutsche, wenn man so will. (NG) more precisely vs. plus précisément vs. genauer These reformulators, together with their numerous variants, are extremely variable syntactically, as shown by the examples below. They pose no serious translation problems; however, they offer interesting insights into collocational constraints: the German gradational reformulators exakter, genauer and präziser combine with other adverbs to form adverb-adverb collocations such as sprachwissenschaftlich exakter, which defy literal translation into either English or French. The reason that may be invoked for this interlingual divergence makes it a highly interesting phenomenon, for it seems to be euphony that plays the crucial role here. Word sequences such as (? )linguistically more precisely or (?)linguistiquement plus précisément do not violate any grammatical or lexical rules, but they do offend against euphony. better described as, plus exactement appelé,besser bekannt als These reformulators are built on the same model as the aforementioned pure reformulators also called, encore appelé (etc.); the adverbs also, encore, auch (etc.) are replaced by an adverb of degree such as better, more properly or more correctly, to name but a few English examples. Oddly, German only has one SLDM to offer in this area, namely besser bekannt als, which suggests that the same reformulatory function is assumed by more complex relative clause constructions in German. Another point to note is that the German reformulator has a ring of easy familiarity about it and tends to

< previous page

page_206

next page >

< previous page

page_207

next page >

Page 207 Table 4.82 more precisely, plus précisément and genauer English (CAE) French (CAF) German (CAG) This recognition gives rise to Burke’s Chaque Im Gegensatz dazu gilt die unbeabsichtigte Durchbrechung numerous discussions of language as compétence der Einheitlichkeit negativ als Stilfehler, genauer Stilbruch,… ‘terministic screens’ through which we élementaire est view, or more accurately construct, représenté par un our reality. signe, ou plus exactement par une icône. That miscegenation was a word Tous les bons Es ist evident, daß unsere gegenwärtigen Lebensprobleme derived from the Latin miscere, to sont du côté de eng verknüpft sind mit unserer technologischen Zivilisation, mix, and genus, race, or, even more l’Empire, ou, plus genauer gesagt. mit der technologischen Verfügungsmacht precisely, from the Greek précisément d’un des Menschen und den daraus resultierenden Konsequenzen melaleukation (a combination of the Bonaparte für die heutige Welt (z.B. ökologische Gefährdung, Greek melas, black, and leukos, sauveur de la genetische Manipulierbarkeit des Menschen etc.). white): République Though it may be un-American to say Plus précisément, Aber selbst die müssen gelegentlich revidiert werden, wie it, not everything is televisible. Or to nous parlerons du wir gesehen haben. Genauer gesagt, sie müssen außerhalb put it more precisely, what is televised ‘multimedia eines reduzierten Gültigkeitsbereichs revidiert werden. is transformed from what it was to intégré’ something else, which may or may not preserve its former essence. occur only in newspapers; it is usually, but by no means always, associated with the use of another, or an assumed, name for a person and may thus be viewed as the gradational equivalent of alias . When used with persons, it has set equivalents in English better known as and French mieux connu sous le nom de. Only few variants are possible, such as besser bekannt unter dem Pseudonym or mieux connu sous son pseudonyme de. Note that the latter translate as better known as into English; there is not one example of better known by his pseudonym/pen name in the corpora examined, although the construction seems well-formed and acceptable at first blush. Some illustrations follow: ‘They’ve only got twelve in a form, sir,’ Deirdre McTavish—better known as Nutty—pointed out the obvious reason for this last coincidence. (NE)

< previous page

page_207

next page >

< previous page

page_208

next page >

Page 208 Une des victimes en est le rédacteur en chef du journal soviétique en anglais Moscow News, Grusenberg, mieux connu sous son pseudo nyme de Borodine. (NF) diese Mode trägt auch die Fürstin von Wales, besser bekannt als Prinzessin Diana (NG) 4.2.4 Repetitional reformulators The group of repetitional reformulators, which may also be referred to as ‘recapitulators’, may equally well be included under the umbrella of referrers. Their main function is to introduce a reminder of something already discussed in the previous discourse. Two main subgroups may be distinguished, which I will now discuss in turn. 4.2.4.1 Restaters The members of the first group (see Table 4.83) allow exact restatements of particular sections of the previous discourse. There appears to be an interesting lexical gap between French on the one hand, and English and German on the other, in that French restaters of the type disons-nous, which allow the restatement of just one word of the previous discourse, have no immediate or obvious equivalent. More confusingly even, it is extremely difficult to translate sentences containing these items into either English or German. The following examples may serve to illustrate this: autrement dit, elle personnalise ce pouvoir en l’imputant à l’analyse. Elle personnalise un pouvoir, disons-nous;mais il ne lui revient pas de personnifier l’allocutaire silencieux du discours analytique. (CAF) Le souvenir du Nom mérite toute l’attention de l’homme des temps présents. Souvenir, disons-nous; nous pourrions dire tout aussi bien mémorial, mémorisation, réminiscence, remembrance, anamnèse. (CAF) Table 4.83 Restaters English French German again disons-nous wohlgemerkt once more avons-nous écrit wiederum once again nous disons bien auch hier here too que disons-nous encore et toujours encore une fois

< previous page

page_208

next page >

< previous page

page_209

next page >

Page 209 «Se distingue», avons-nous écrit, non «s’oppose», car l’opposition n’apparaît que lorsque la raison se déclare incompatible avec la foi (CAF) It seems impossible to find an English or German connector that fulfils the same function as disons-nous; nor is this kind of repetition of syntagmas in any way frequent in these languages. The translator will be hard put to produce a faithful yet idiomatic translation of such sentences; she will have to resort to circumlocutions such as note my choice of words; man beachte die Wortwahl; ich wiederhole; ich wähle dieses Wort mit Bedacht; wir haben gesagt, daβ . An added complication affecting the German translator is that German academic texts tend to be written in an impersonal style, a factor which may render the last two translation proposals non-viable. Following are two possible translations of the second of the above example sentences (le souvenir du Nom…): The memory of the name deserves the whole attention of present-day humans. Of course, ‘memory’ might equally well be replaced by ‘memorial’, ‘memorisation’, ‘reminiscence’, ‘remembrance’ or ‘anamnesis’. Die Erinnerung an den Namen verdient die volle Aufmerksamkeit des heutigen Menschen. Für ‘Erinnerung’ könnte hier ebenso gut Gedenken, Verinnerlichung oder Anamnese stehen. Another restater of exactly the same type is nous disons bien; it has a direct equivalent in German wohlgemerkt. Translation by English mind you is barred in most academic texts because this marker belongs to a collo quial register; it is, however, sometimes found in newspaper language. Passée donc l’étape de la documentation, nous présumons que le traducteur a compris globalement ce dont il s’agit. Nous disons bien globalement, parce que la phase de décodage peut comporter certains pièges sémantiques particuliers au domaine médical, que le traducteur doit connaître s’il veut les éviter. (CAF) French restaters such as encore une fois and encore et toujours are easier to translate into English and German, where again and wiederum (or noch einmal ) constitute direct equivalents: Par là se trouvent expliquées les œuvres de Brandes au Danemark, d’Ibsen en Norvège et surtout du plus grand écrivain suédois, August Strindberg (1848–1912) dont toute la vie se sera passée à crier, par la poésie, le roman, la nouvelle et surtout le drame, son angoisse existentielle, son besoin d’amour, sa quête d’absolu, c’est-à-dire, encore et

< previous page

page_209

next page >

< previous page

page_210

next page >

Page 210 toujours, sa recherche passionnée de lui-même selon tous les registres de l’écriture, du romantisme au symbolisme en passant par le réalisme et le naturalisme selon une alchimie dont lui seul possède la clé. (EU) 4.2.4.2 Linkers The second group of recapitulators enable the author to foreground information that the reader should already be familiar with. They differ from other reformulators in that they can link back to spans of text lying several pages, sections or chapters to the left of the present discourse. This group may theoretically be further divided into two sub-sets. The first subset would contain only those recapitulators that enable links with the same article or book. Examples are as noted aboυe, as already mentioned, etc. The second sub-set would comprise reformulators which allow intertextual links to be made by indicating a source of textual information which lies outside the current text; witness the following examples: The idea that demonstratives perform this highlighting function was, it will be recalled, a point made by Bolinger (1972). (CAE) Nous avons déjà ailleurs avancé l’hypothèse qu’il commence (CAF) Das Motiv der, völligen Aufklärung‘ (56), wie es schon bei Lessing geheißen hatte, die durch eine erzieherische Religion erreicht werden soll, darf als ein zentrales Anliegen Hölderlins bezeichnet werden. (CAG) However, since modifications of the first sub-set, such as as was already noted by Atkinson (1965) can assume the same role, the distinction is somewhat otiose. Closely linked to the recapitulators being examined are relative and participial clause patterns which allow the writer to refer back to particular entities or ideas: the kinds of collocation described in preceding pages (CAE) la théorie du lexique-grammaire citée précédemment (CAF) dieser Typus, der mehrfach zur Rede stand, (CAG) I have excluded from consideration SLDMs based on the verbs remember, remind, recall, rappeler and erinnern. Even a casual inspection of their use in academic text reveals that their commonest function is not to remind the reader of some previously mentioned entity or idea but rather to emphasize the importance of previously mentioned or new information. In other words, they are emphasizers that may also serve as recapitu-

< previous page

page_210

next page >

< previous page

page_211

next page >

Page 211 Table 4.84 Emphasizers based on the verbs remember, rappeler and erinnern English French German (also) remember/recall that Rappelons (brièvement) (que/NP) Rufen wir uns in Erinnerung, daß it is worth remembering that Rappelons aussi que Es sei nur erinnert an+NP Table 4.85 Linkers as recapitulators English French German as already mentioned ainsi qu’il est dit plus haut wie gesagt as pointed out above comme nous l’avons wie bereits ausgeführt as discussed in suggéré déjà à plusieurs wie (im Vorwort) reprises as indicated at several points in the disions-nous,… angedeutet wie schon bemerkt book as noted earlier nous le disions plus haut wie gezeigt as was said at the beginning avons-nous dit on l’a vu wie weiter oben in Form einer Hypothese festgestellt as we have seen in section on a vu que nous avons vu wie schon erwähnt wurde que as we mentioned earlier wie oben schon ausgeführt we have seen that lators rather than the other way round. A few examples may be given nevertheless (see Table 4.84). Another closely related group are summarizers of the type to recapitulate or zur Erinnerung, but we will here content ourselves with considering clear examples of recapitulators (see Table 4.85). 4.2.4.2.1 ENGLISH LINKERS English linkers are based on clauses or sentence fragments containing reporting verbs and verbs of perception or showing in the past and present perfect tenses. This type of recapitulation was first touched upon by Tadros (1985; 1994:76), who omits to mention that linkers, or ‘recall signals’ as he calls them, occur in four major patterns, and, while listing a fair number of reporting verbs, fails to see that each of the patterns has a specific lexis (despite much common ground): 1 Clauses with a past participle introduced by the subordinator as. These clauses are elliptical versions of type 2 (as already said). The verbs regularly entering this pattern are argue, assume, caution, claim,

< previous page

page_211

next page >

< previous page

page_212

next page >

Page 212

discuss, highlight, hint at, hypothesize, imply, note, obserυe, outline, point out, quote, recall, say, see and state, but other verbs such as list or study may also occur. 2 Subordinate clauses introduced by as which contain a first-person personal pronoun (as we mentioned earlier). All the above verbs can enter this pattern, but, interestingly, there are a number of other verbs commonly occurring in it: allude, describe, establish, explain, mention, make plain, remark, report. 3 Sentence fragments containing a first-person personal pronoun; these are often combined with a place adverbial such as in earlier chapters or aboυe (seυeral chapters back, I described) . Here the list of verbs capable of entering the pattern is, of course, even larger, including items describing a wide variety of scientific activities. 4 Sentence fragments beginning with impersonal it followed by a passive verb (it has already been pointed out that, it will be recalled) . These are normally placed clause-initially and followed by a that -clause, but may sometimes be interpolated in the middle of the clause. The verbs entering this pattern are essentially the same as those used with pattern 1 above. These patterns usually include time or place adverbs such as aboυe, earlier, already, in the aboυe discussion, in earlier chapters, in the preceding section, especially when the verb is in the past tense. Interestingly, the present perfect tense also occurs with time adverbs such as aboυe or earlier (as we haυe seen aboυe, as we haυe discussed earlier). Syntactically speaking, clauses of type 1 and 2 above are remarkably mobile, appearing initially, medially or finally. When placed initially, they may occupy several different positions. Most commonly, they take front position: As already noted, this scenario takes place in the U.S., …(CAE) They may also stand after an initial adverb or subject; the latter may even be quite long: First, as already noted,…(CAE) The third major venue for prostitution in the borough, as already mentioned, was at the Bankside amusements, particularly at the theaters. (CAE) Medial position is less common; note that the following example breaks the strict adjacency rule found in many grammars of English: The base/superstructure paradigm also has a demoralising effect on

< previous page

page_212

next page >

< previous page

page_213

next page >

Page 213 women, because it dictates, as I already noted. that gender oppression is the result of class oppression in the material base (CAE) Final position is least common: As for the right-wing, a President intent on withdrawal would have called upon the most highly-respected military figures for support, as already noted. (CAE) However, there is another pattern which usually occurs finally; it involves the use of the general abstract noun point which neatly encapsulates the preceding discourse: It is particularly helpful to work at meaningful sentence completion because of the difficulty of keeping long sentences in mind while sorting out sense, syntax, vocabulary, and the process of writing down—a point referred to earlier in this section. (CAE) When embedded in other subclauses, the clauses in question stand immediately after the subordinator—as is the rule in such cases. 4.2.4.2.2 FRENCH LINKERS Similar observations can be made for French. We may distinguish four basic patterns based around the use of a verb of saying, perceiving or showing: 1 Subordinate clauses introduced by comme, ainsi que or, more rarely, tel que. This structure has an active and a passive variant (comme nous l’aυons déjà dit—comme il/cela a déjà été dit); the former always involves the use of the object pronoun le . The verbs used are aυancer, faire allusion, conυenir, dire, éυoquer, indiquer, noter, montrer, signaler, souligner and υoir . 2 Interpolated main clauses placed between two commas or dashes (…, nous le disions plus haut,…) . There are also two variants here, one based on normal word order and the object pronoun le, the other based on inversion of the verb phrase. Verbs occur in both the past tense and the present perfect tense. 3 Sentence fragments containing the first-person pronouns je or nous; the latter is frequently replaced by an inclusive third-person on (on a υu que) . 4 A passive variant of the latter, using impersonal il, as in il a déjà été indiqué que . Common adverbials used with these structures are plus haut, précédemment, dans ces pages, dans les pages précédentes, au chapitre III, etc. Unlike their English counterparts, the structures are governed by a number of lexical

< previous page

page_213

next page >

< previous page

page_214

next page >

Page 214 constraints: first, the distribution of verbs across the individual structures is much less even; for example, υoir does not occur in the passive voice (*il a été υu que) , but is the most frequent verb by far in the second and third patterns. Second, the use of déjà is extremely rare in clauses of the second type, but nonetheless possible: Il n’y a, avons-nous déjà dit, dialogue que lorsqu’il y a symétrie possible entre les locuteurs. (CAF) By contrast, the mobility of these markers is even greater than that of their English counterparts. Most commonly, of course, they are found in initial position: Nous l’avons dit, le modèle typologique n’a pas été créé pour rendre compte de l’évolution des langues. (CAF) Nous avons déjà vu que…(CAF) They may also appear as the second initial element following an adverb phrase, a prepositional phrase or a subject noun phrase: premièrement, il y a déjà été fait allusion, on n’a pas là…(CAF) Le pardon, avons-nous vu, est une réalité essentiellement juridique (CAF) Unlike English linkers, they may also occur as the third initial element: En revanche, dans le Sud, comme on l’a déjà noté, le désert monte haut dans la montagne (EU) They frequently follow initial car, mais, si, en effet and other connectors; this is only possible with initial if in English, as in English relations of subordination are not normally expressed in two separate sentences: Si, comme nous l’avons dit en introduction, la communication des méthodes, des concepts et des résultats de la recherche…F) Non pas, on l’a vu, que le poème se dissolve en un sens global et résumé (CAF) In mid-position, they tend to be inserted between a verb and its object; the latter may also be an infinitive clause: La centralisation et l’urbanisation ont provoqué—nous l’avons vu—une mutation radicale des mentalités et des modes de vie. (CAF)

< previous page

page_214

next page >

< previous page

page_215

next page >

Page 215 Prudent, il s’interdit, nous l’avons vu, de déduire de l’économie générale du traité une prohibition de principe de celles-ci. (CAF) They may also be interpolated between the auxiliary and the participle. Examples of such tmesis are, however, few and far between: Enfin, alors qu’on a souvent, comme on l’a dit plus haut, magnifié par opposition au cri, le caractère articulé du langage, on insiste aujourd’hui sur le fait que…(CAF) Other medial positions are also found; witness the following example: L’autre conséquence de ce nouveau cadrage nous intéresse ici plus particulièrement puisqu’elle touche à l’autonomie et à la réhabilitation (dont les conditions de possibilités étaient déjà présentes, nous l’avons vu, dans le programme d’Avicenne) de la fonction mimétique et représentative (muhakat, takhyil). (CAF) Lastly, French linkers may appear in end-position: Le pardon et la réconciliation marchent ensemble, avons-nous dit au début de cet exposé. (CAF) The Late Bourgeois World s’inscrit dans le contexte des événements de Sharpeville, nous l’avons déjà souligné. (CAF) 4.2.4.2.3 GERMAN LINKERS German linkers are lexico-grammatically less variable than their English and French counterparts. The vast majority of instances are based on participial clauses introduced by the subordinator wie, such as wie bereits angedeutet. Although perfectly acceptable, only very few extensions of this pattern can be located, yielding a subordinate clause with a subject pronoun (wie ich schon sagte, wie wir schon gesehen haben). The commonest verbs entering this pattern are darstellen, darlegen, erwähnen, besprechen, zeigen, andeuten, sehen, bemerken, mitteilen, feststetten, ansprechen, beschreiben and ausführen. German repetitional reformulators of this type are at least as mobile as their French counterparts. Most commonly, they appear in initial position, followed by the verb in second position: Wie bereits erwähnt, hängt die Bedeutung der affektiven Komponente von der individuellen Wahrnehmung oder psychomotorischen Erfahrung des einzelnen Kindes ab. (CAG)

< previous page

page_215

next page >

< previous page

page_216

next page >

Page 216 It goes without saying that this word order is barred when the recapitulator is followed by a colon: Wie oben schon gesagt: Ein anderer Genius des Ortes und ein anderer Genius der Zeit verlangt im Abstand nur ganz weniger Jahre oft diametral Anderes. (CAG) In subordinate clauses German recapitulators generally follow the subordinator: Da, wie ich schon sagte, der Tod bzw. das ‘Vorlaufen zum Tod’ die äußerste Möglichkeit des Daseins erst konstituiert, spricht Heidegger auch von der Vorlaufenden Entschlossenheit’ (SZ, 310). (CAG) Ich will zum Schluß nur auf die durchaus in sich geschlossene Konstruktion des Romans hinweisen, die, wie schon angedeutet wurde, auf einem weiblichen Nein zum Kapitalismus beruht. (CAG) In mid-position, they often disrupt the strict adjacency of verbs and their objects: Hat er diese Möglichkeit nicht, dann wird er qua Geistsetzung notwendig schuldig—und eine solche Notwendigkeit löst, wie bereits dargestellt, den Begriff der Schuld auf. (CAG) A similar remark can be made for brace constructions, where the reformulator often precedes the subject: In Kapitel 7 werden dann, wie bereits erwähnt, ein Kriterien-und ein Thesenkatalog vorgestellt, die die Ergebnisse dieser Arbeit in knapper Form zusammenfassen. (CAG) Other positions are also found, albeit less frequently: Umso wichtiger ist die Feststellung, daß es Susan Reynolds in ihrem Buch, wie schon gesagt, nicht um den Feudalismus geht, über den so viel und so viel Widersprüchliches geschrieben worden ist. (CAG) Selbst bei der detaillierten Studie G.Wotjaks (1984), die das Verdienst hat, ausführlich den kommunikativfunktionalen Aspekt in die «faux ami»-Diskussion integriert zu haben und die den Terminus «faux ami», wie oben schon erwähnt, in Frage stellt, scheint es, als ob…(CAG)

< previous page

page_216

next page >

< previous page

page_217

next page >

Page 217 4.2.4.2.4 LINKERS IN COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE Linkers are syntactically rather than semantically difficult to handle. As seen in the preceding pages, the rules governing their position are not identical in all three languages, and this may lead to challenging, if not insurmountable translation problems. Consider the following sentence, already cited above: En revanche, dans le Sud, comme on l’a déjà noté, le désert monte haut dans la montagne. (EU) If an English translator were to reproduce the initial sequence of three adverbials as it stands, she would end up with a sentence of doubtful acceptability: (?) By contrast/However, in the South, as we have already noted, the desert reaches high up into the mountains. But a slight change in word order will restore a fully acceptable sentence: In the South, however, as already noted, the desert reaches high up into the mountains. (my translation) But even this might still be improved upon by placing the recapitulator in final position, an order that is easier to process for the English reader: In the South, however, the desert reaches up high into the mountains, as already noted. (my translation) A good German translation would have to be framed along similar lines: Im Süden dagegen, wie bereits erwähnt, erstreckt sich die Wüste bis hoch in die Berge hinauf. (my translation) Or better even: Im Süden dagegen erstreckt sich die Wüste, wie bereits erwähnt, bis hoch in die Berge hinauf. (my translation) Besides position, verb choice is an area of difficulty, especially when translating into French. As pointed out above, verb choice is severely constrained in interpolated clauses. A fledgling translator not yet immune to source language interference may be sorely tempted to use verbs other than dire and υoir . Another potential pitfall is the need to insert an object pronoun in French interpolated main clauses of the first type.

< previous page

page_217

next page >

< previous page

page_218

next page >

Page 218 4.2.5 Summary We began our discussion of reformulators with an outline of possible divisions of the class, arguing in favour of a division by semantic-pragmatic criteria into four subcategories: pure reformulators, gradational reformulators, repetitional reformulators and reformulatory stance markers. We distinguished two basic modes of reformulation; namely, the intensional and the extensional, which in turn gave rise to more subtle distinctions. A browsing of the monolingual corpora showed that the pure reformulators that is, c’est-à-dire and das heiβt all have the full range of intensional and extensional modes, which suggests a great degree of translational equivalence. This finding was confirmed and further refined through an inspection of the English and French sections of the multilingual translation corpus, which showed the zero connector to be another important choice in rendering that is. This choice was particularly frequent when that is occurred in an extensional mode close in meaning to namely or when it introduced intensional definitions. In the other translation direction c’est-à-dire was commonly rendered by zero when it occurred in bracketed or dashed glosses. The pure reformulators in other words, en d’autres termes and mit anderen Worten all occur in the intensional mode; this mode therefore poses few translation problems. However, in other words also has an extensional/quantificational mode not paralleled by its French and German equivalents. In this mode it is normally rendered by soit. Generally speaking, we found there to be perfect equivalents between pure reformulators of the type also called, most of which have so far escaped scholarly notice: then called—alors appelé, preυiously knawn as—anciennement nommé, locally called—appelé localement, etc. However, the apparent simplicity of such pairings tends to conceal many subtleties of usage. Thus, désarmais appelé translates either as henceforth or as thereafter called, depending on context, and υariously called finds only a partial equivalent in diυersement nommé. The combination of monolingual and multilingual approaches showed that French possesses a more subtly differentiated set of pure reformulators, with a large number of different items serving functions performed by a smaller number of English equivalents. As for gradational reformulators, we found that not to say, pour ne pas dire and um nicht zu sagen are exact semantic and syntactic equivalents, whereas things are more complex with if not, υoire, ja and similar markers. For example, if not cannot be placed in front of prepositional phrases without changing its meaning, so that or even, or indeed and if not indeed must be used as translation equivalents; υoire can introduce combinations of verb and noun phrases, a feature which German can only replicate through changes in word order. We also noted interesting collocational features of gradational reformulators which complexify equivalence relations. Thus, υoire was found to collocate with simplement, carrément, franchement and tout court.

< previous page

page_218

next page >

< previous page

page_219

next page >

Page 219 Our analysis of repetitional reformulators revealed an intriguing lexical gap: French restaters of the type disons-nous were found to have no immediate equivalent in either English or German. Recapitulors of the type comme on l’a déjà noté were shown to be syntactically rather than semantically difficult to handle, as the rules governing their position are not identical in all three languages. 4.3 Inferrers Inferrers provide transition from one or more statements considered as true to another, the truth of which is believed to follow from the former. They are sometimes difficult to distinguish from markers which introduce elaborations on the possible real-world—rather than purely logical—consequences of preceding statements; here I focus on inferrers in the sense just outlined while perforce listing some examples of dual category members. In RST terms, we are dealing with the relations referred to as ‘volitional and non-volitional results’, but mainly with the latter. In both relations the nucleus presents a situation that (could have) caused the situation presented in the satellite, and that latter situation is more central to the writer’s purposes than that presented in the satellite. The effect is that the reader recognizes, or better perhaps, acknowledges that the situation presented in the nucleus could have caused the situation in the satellite (Mann and Thompson 1988:275–276). A complication is that inferrers defy watertight classification. I have assigned them to three major categories: first, inferrers based on υerba dicendi (e.g. this is not to say that ) and verbs with a similar meaning; second, suggestive inferrers (e.g. it is no surprise, then, that ); third, two-element inferrers (e.g. from here it follows that ). The dividing lines between these three categories are not always easy to draw. Thus, from intuition, das heiβt, dass would seem to belong to the category based around υerba dicendi and other verbs with a similar meaning. But what of its variant in der Konsequenz heiβt dies, dass, which owing to the presence of in der Konsequenz seems to fit more neatly into the second category based around verbs and nouns suggesting inference? In such cases, the verb phrase is considered to be the primary factor, so that the SLDM in question would be placed in the first category. 4.3.1 Inferrers based on verba dicendi and verbs with a similar meaning Table 4.86 presents an overview of the category in question; French items which have been overlooked in previous studies (especially Grieve 1996) have been set in italic type. I shall now look at each language in turn.

< previous page

page_219

next page >

< previous page

page_220

Page 220 Table 4.86 Inferrers based on υerba dicendi English to (INF) is to (INF) (all) this is to say that this/which argues/ entails/implies/ indicates/means/ proves/shows/ suggests that this view (etc.) implies that the consequence/ upshot/result is that the conclusion is that the corollary is that the implication is that it turns out that

this (that) is (emphatically) not to say that which is not to say that this is not to argue/deny /imply/suggest that

< previous page

next page >

French autant dire que c’est dire que/si c’est υous dire que/si c’est dire+noun c’est dire combien/ à quel point c’est assez (suffisamment) dire que/si c’est (donc) peu dire que /c’est peu de dire que/ c’est peu dire, C’est dire. cela reυient à dire que tout cela pour dire que qui dit…dit…

German das sagt schon alles; damit ist schon alles gesagt; dem ist nichts hinzuzufügen; das muß schon was heißen das heißt (d.h.), dass das heißt aber dann/aber auch, dass dies besagt, dass dies signalisiert, dass dies impliziert, dass dies verdeutlicht, dass dies zeigt, dass dies legt die Vermutung nahe, dass dies legt die Annahme ce n’est pas dire (cependant) nahe, dass que dies bedeutet, dass in der ce n’est pas à dire que Konsequenz ceci n’est pas pour dire que… bedeutet dies, dass cela/ce qui ne υeut pas dire für NP bedeutet dies, dass que im vorliegenden Fall bedeutet nous ne υoulons pas dire que dies, dass cela ne signifie pas/ mit anderen Worten nullement que ausgedrückt bedeutet dies, (mais) il ne faudrait pas dass croire que insgesamt bedeutet dies, dass on ne saurait pourtant en dies (alles) schließt déduire que (allerdings/jedoch) nicht aus, il ne faudrait cependant pas dass en conclure/ déduire que dies soll nicht heißen, dass on ne saurait en déduire que das heißt jedoch/aber nicht, cela ne reυient pas à dire dass que dies bedeutet allerdings nicht, qu’on n’aille point croire dass cependant que damit soll nicht gesagt sein ce n ‘est pas peu dire /werden, dass cela veut dire/signifie/ prouvedies besagt allerdings nicht, bien que dass Ce qui prouve bien que… dass heißt ce qui semble montrer que selbstverständlich nicht, dass damit will ich nicht sagen, dass

page_220

next page >

< previous page

page_221

next page >

Page 221 4.3.1.1 English The simplest inferential mode in English is to be found in two-part sentences based on the repetition of the infinitive of a υerbum dicendi such as say or suggest. As the wording suggests, this kind of inferrer is functionally very similar to a reformulator. The second example shows that the first part of the structure has an occasional variant in the for +object+infinitive construction, while the second may be replaced by wordings such as ‘is the same as’ or ‘is tantamount to’ followed by the gerund: To say that anything spiritual, such as God or the soul, is an incorporeal substance, is to say in effect, there is no spirit at all. But, just as Hobbes does not deny we have a mind or soul, so he does not deny the existence of God. Apart, however, from his existence as a corporeal omnipotent first cause, all else about God was a matter of faith. (CAE) Consider the wealth of billionaire Bill Gates, the founder of MicroSoft. Gates earned billions because millions of individuals voluntarily spent their money on what they wanted—his products. For someone to say that Gates’s income is unfair is the same as saying that the decisions of millions of consumers are wrong. To argue that Gates’s income should be forcibly taken and given to others is to say that somehow third parties have a right to preempt voluntary decisions made by millions of traders. (CAE) The verb be also occurs quite frequently in this structure, often intro ducing a definition rather than an inference: To be enlightened is to be aware, always, of total reality in its immanent otherness—to be aware of it and yet to remain in a condition to survive as an animal, to think and feel as a human being, to resort whenever expedient to systematic reasoning. (CAE) An offshoot of this inferrer is the structure built around the verb say and anaphoric this, that or which . This is sometimes indistinguishable from the reformulator that is to say: Language is, essentially, the expression of thoughts. This is to say that only if a verbal performance is an expression of a thought does it constitute a linguistic act. (CAE) The third type of inferrer in this group shares anaphoric this, which or that with the preceding group, the latter serving to form lexical bundles with common verbs which express inference, such as entail, indicate, mean and suggest:

< previous page

page_221

next page >

< previous page

page_222

next page >

Page 222 Language extinction by natural disaster and language shift are natural processes that have always gone on. Consequently, the branching rates in family trees drawn for surviving languages are not diversification rates but survival rates. Survival rates are less than diversification rates because there is always a nonzero probability of extinction, and this entails that older genetic groupings and more ancient nodes in family trees have, on average, fewer initial branches than younger ones. (CAE) Some of these have a tendency to collocate with summative nouns serving an anaphoric function, such as υiew+imply: Moreover, demonstrating resolve to other countries is an ambiguous proposition—drug warriors can glibly argue that any shift in priorities or reduction in spending sends a message to source countries that the United States is losing interest in the fight against illegal drugs. Such a view implies that we must spend evermore money regardless of results if only to confirm that United States politicians take the drug problem seriously. The era of continuous drug budget increases, however, is over. The cost of mostly symbolic efforts may be foregoing [sic] programs more likely to have a substantive effect. (CAE) There are also a number of nominal variants of the verbal inferrers just discussed (see Table 4.86). Oddly enough, the suggestion is that does not count among the nominal variants of this suggests that, meaning as it does ‘what is insinuated here is that’. This shows that straightforward class shifts are not always permissible, thereby highlighting the impact of the lexical environment on meaning. Most of the aforementioned inferrers can be negated; in fact, the close relationship between this is to say that and inferrers of the type this implies that is evident from such negations as this is not to imply that: If online businesses are subjected to the regulation of every potential jurisdiction, Internet commerce will face an almost insurmountable burden in attempting to predict what requirements might be imposed upon it. This is not to argue that ignorance of the law is an excuse. Given the finite number of U.S. jurisdictions that might have contact with an Internet site, there are only a finite number of applicable state regulations. (CAE) Another moderately common inferrer which may be subsumed under this heading is it turns out that . It differs from the other inferrers so far mentioned in that it commonly refers to the results of other studies rather than the author’s own: Researchers studying genre and discourse have shown that different

< previous page

page_222

next page >

< previous page

page_223

next page >

Page 223 types of commimication have different grammatical signatures; that is, different types of communication make use of different grammatical structures and can be characterized in terms of those grammar items (Biber, 1988; Biber, Conrad and Reppen, 1994; Conrad, 1996 and 1996b; Grabe, 1987). It turns out that grammar has a lot in common with vocabulary as revealed in computerized studies of extensive collections of written and spoken English. (CAE) 4.3.1.2 French The most prominent members of this group are the French inferrers based on dire, some of which have received brief treatment in Grieve (1996:171ff.); members of the set overlooked by Grieve have been set in italic type in the table placed at the beginning of this section. As Grieve points out, the primary function of the structure can be neatly paraphrased as follows: ‘dire ce que je viens de dire entraîne ce que je vais dire’. Literally equating the value of the preceding discourse with that of the subsequent discourse, it normally implies inference, as in the following example: A supposer même qu’on s’en tienne à la seule tradition grammaticale européenne, il convient de prendre en compte une grande diversité historique. Cette tradition, qui forme le fond de ce qu’on pourrait appeler l’opinion grammaticale courante et qu’on retrouve, plus ou moins semblable à elle-même, dans les grammaires usuelles (scolaires ou non), remonte pour l’essentiel à la grammaire grecque, réinterprétée par les grammairiens latins, puis sans cesse remaniée au fil des siècles. C’est dire que le terme grammaire appartient à des configurations intellectuelles fort différentes et même absolument hétérogènes: il y a peu de rapports entre la philosophie stoïcienne, où s’est constituée, dans ses grandes lignes, l’usuelle liste des parties du discours et la philosophie, consciente ou inconsciente, des grammairiens modernes qui recourent à une telle liste; il y a peu de rapports entre la philosophie des maîtres de Port-Royal qui ont fixé l’opposition entre relatives déterminatives et non déterminatives et la philosophie avouée des grammairiens modernes qui reprennent cette opposition, etc. (CAF) This usage probably originated from, and is indeed still alive in, two-part sentences such as the following (see also Grieve 1996:171–172): Dire «le tigre», c’est dire tous les tigres qui l’engendrèrent, le cerf et les tortues qu’il dévora, l’herbe dont se nourrissent les cerfs, la terre qui fut la mère de l’herbe, le ciel qui donna le jour à la terre. (CAF)

< previous page

page_223

next page >

< previous page

page_224

next page >

Page 224 A simple but rhetorically effective mode of c’est dire has been derived from this usage: qui dit A, dit (aussi) B, meaning ‘from A follows B’; this inferrer also has a negative mode: Qui dit authentique, dit accents variés…(NF) Qui dit ‘sans-papiers’ ne dit pas ‘clandestin’. (NF) In all these usages c’est dire and its variants bear considerable resemblance to pure reformulators such as en d’autres termes, with the key difference that they are somewhat more variable, in particular in allowing negative forms as variants. As Table 4.86 shows, c’est dire que has a number of variants which imply differing degrees or types of inference. A fair number of these have not yet been recorded in reference books or the research literature. Apart from the oversights just mentioned, Grieve takes no account of the fact that the personal pronoun υous can be added to the structure, especially in newspaper French. It may be noted in passing that this variant of the inferrer, like some other SLDMs, occurs mainly in the spoken language, a fact which has so far gone unnoticed in the literature and might well deserve a separate study: Tout est détail dans le haut niveau, ce sont des détails qui font gagner une finale. Celle-ci a été une apothéose pour moi: 3–0 contre le grand Brésil! Si l’équipe de France avait perdu, on aurait dit qu’elle n’était décidément pas au niveau et qu’elle avait bénéficié d’un parcours facile. On aurait dénigré, comme d’habitude. C’est vous dire si j’y tenais, à cette finale. (NF) Like some other SLDMs, c’est dire also admits a nominal complement, which, on account of its brevity, is usually seen as having higher stylistic value. There are a number of strong collocations, the most frequent of which is c’est dire l’importance. This nominal mode tends to go together with constructions of the type ce fléau social qu’est le cancer (Gallagher 2000). It thus acts as a stylistically preferable variant of a more cumbersome verbal construction: Un diabétique sur dix meurt aveugle; c’est dire le drame humain et social que cela représente quand on sait que le nombre de diabétiques connus ou méconnus est estimé à plus de un million de personnes en France (EU) C’est peu de dire que and c’est peu dire que are common variants signalling that the subsequent discourse is of the order of an understatement; they are frequently used as emphasizers rather than inferrers. Grieve (1996)

< previous page

page_224

next page >

< previous page

page_225

next page >

Page 225 misjudges the relative frequency of these items. In fact, c’est peu dire que is more common than c’est peu de dire que: Pour réussir à coloniser les îles, une solide embarcation ne suffit pas…. Les ‘conquérants’ peuvent buter sur des résidents peu hospitaliers, un manque de ressources et un milieu naturel hostile. Les plus chanceux seront alors ceux qui allient souplesse écologique (faculté de diversifier son régime alimentaire, par exemple), démographie galopante et aptitude au vagabondage (pour découvrir les meilleurs habitats possibles). C’est peu dire que l’implantation d’une nouvelle espèce sur une île demeure un événement rare. (CAF) C’est dire combien/à quel point and c’est assez dire stress the truth of the following statement. Ce troisième tome de la réédition de La Grande Anthologie du fantastique contient, sous une illustration de couverture saisissante qui reproduit le détail d’une peinture d’Arnold Böcklin, les volumes thématiques suivants: Histoires de morts-υiυants, Histoires démoniaques, Histoires d’occultisme et de sorcellerie et Histoires de maléfices. C’est, sans conteste, le tome qui comprend les modifications de sommaire les plus importantes, puisqu’y figurent quatorze nouvelles qui ne faisaient pas partie de la première sélection. C’est assez dire que le travail de révision entrepris par les anthologistes pour parfaire leur ouvrage a été important. (CAF) There is also an absolute mode of c’est dire, functioning like a rhetorical question, in which the reader is left to draw her own conclusions. A variant of this is c’est tout dire: La rencontre opposait une selection d’Europe au reste du (beau) monde. Elle ne restera pas dans les annales par ses qualités footballistiques. Maradona, qui n’avait pas joué un match depuis août 1996, a largement pu suivre le rythme malgré ses trente-sept ans. C’est dire. (NF) A notably common, mainly journalistic variant is tout cela pour dire que; as the use of tout suggests, it tends to have scope over a larger stretch of the previous discourse than c’est dire. Donc 2000 sera une date comme une autre. Absolument unique, absolument banale. Sauf qu’un peu plus ronde, pleine de zéros comme compteur kilomètrique d’un vieux siècle d’occasion, d’un millénaire à bout de souffle. Soupapes et moteur à revoir! Contrôle

< previous page

page_225

next page >

< previous page

page_226

next page >

Page 226 technique pour tous. Tout cela pour dire que la fête qui s’annonce a un peu une tête d’enterrement. (NF) Other variants of c’est dire are cela/ce qui υeut dire/signifie/montre/prouυe que . These may occur with a hedging device designed to express academic modesty or tentativeness, such as the verb sembler . We now turn to the negative variants of c’est dire. Their primary function is to pre-empt erroneous conclusions which the reader is likely to draw from the previous discourse. Ce qui ne υeut pas dire is one such variant, which frequently collocates with éυidemment and pour autant: Pour 1999, la décision est maintenant prise, en tout cas, pour le tabac: il n’y aura pas de majoration d’impôt. Ce qui ne veut pas dire pour autant que les fumeurs n’auront pas à mettre la main au portefeuille. L’effort qui leur sera demandé n’aura cependant rien de spectaculaire. (NF) The question arises of the mode to be used in the complement clause introduced by que . The answer is that the SLDMs in question may be placed on a cline: with cela ne signifie pas (or: nullement) que, the likelihood of the subjunctive occurring in the complement clause is highest. Ce n’est pas dire que is followed by both modes, with the subjunctive being slightly more frequent. With ce qui ne υeut pas dire que we find a fifty-fifty split between the indicative and die subjunctive. By contrast, cela ne reυient pas à dire que, ceci n’est pas pour dire que and cela n’est pas peu dire que are all followed by the indicative. We also find a number of preferred first-level marker collocates here, producing such combinations as cela ne signifie certes/cependant pas que: La mission protestante d’aujourd’hui cherche à redéfinir ses buts, sa problématique et ses méthodes. Cela ne signifie certes pas que sa tâche spécifique soit achevée, mais plutôt, comme le prouve la décision prise à New Delhi en 1961, que ses problèmes propres coïncident de plus en plus avec ceux qui se posent à l’ensemble du protestantisme et sans doute même a toute la Chrétienté. (EU) 4.3.1.3 German German appears to lack an inferrer based around the verb sagen in the affirmative mode, but does offer a negative mode: damit soll nicht gesagt sein, dass and its variants. Its primary function is to show that a particular conclusion does not necessarily follow from a particular premise, thereby pre-empting one-sided or erroneous conclusions on the reader’s part. ‘Alle Menschen streben nach dem Guten’ sagen Aristoteles und Thomas von Aquin. Hildebrand stimmt ihnen darin durchaus zu. Das

< previous page

page_226

next page >

< previous page

page_227

next page >

Page 227 Gute, solange darunter irgendetwas als positiv bedeutsam Gegebenes gemeint wird, wird in der Tat immer erstrebt. Doch ist damit nicht gesagt, daß unser Glück oder überhaupt ein einheitlicher Sinn des Guten Gegenstand jeden menschlichen Tuns, Handelns oder Liebens sein müßte. (CAG) Probably the commonest inferrer in this category is dies bedeutet, dass . It may co-occur with adverbials overtly enhancing the inferential value of the marker, such as in der Konsequenz and logisch: Konnte bei der ersten Begründung der deutschen Schutzgewalt in Ostafrika und anderen afrikanischen Gebietsteilen der Eindruck entstehen, der Kaiser übernehme durch die Erteilung des Schutzbriefes eine persönliche Schutzhoheit, stellte das SchGG jetzt klar, daß die Schutzhoheit eine Angelegenheit des Reiches war und nur der Ausübung nach dem Kaiser zustand. In der Konsequenz bedeutete dies, daß die Schutzgebiete mit dem Reich nicht durch Personalunion verbunden, sondern ihm zugeordnet waren. (CAG) Die berühmte Devise des retour à la nature ging darauf, eben diejenige Geschichte zu tilgen, die für den Philosophen und Historiker Hume der letzte Grund der Wahrheit aller nicht-analytischen Urteile war. Logisch bedeutet dies, daß die Copula, die die Entwicklung des Prädikats aus dem Subjekt, mithin Entwicklung überhaupt, d. h. Geschichte anzeigt, eben jene lêthê ist, die Hume der Gewohnheit angesehen hatte. (CAG) The inferrer may also be specified by a prepositional phrase introduced by the prepositions angesichts or bei. Such specification provides back-ground information from which statements in the complement clause can be logically deduced: Vor allem in den großen Städten kam es zu einem bedeutenden Zuwachs an Prostituierten. Im Berlin der Jahrhundertwende gab es allein 50.000 Prostituierte, davon waren nur ca. ein Zwölftel registriert. Bei einer Einwohnerzahl Berlins von gut 1.300.000 bedeutete dies, daß jede 13. weibliche Person in Berlin (incl. der Mädchen und alten Frauen) der Prostitution nachging. (CAG) It should be mentioned in passing that dies bedeutet, dass also has an explanatory mode, as exemplified in the following passage: Das Abwälzen der Auseinandersetzung mit der Informationsverarbeitung auf elektronischer Basis auf Fachabteilungen, EDV-Abteilungen, Informatiker oder externe Berater führt häufig nur zu noch größerer

< previous page

page_227

next page >

< previous page

page_228

next page >

Page 228 Distanz und zu teilweise immenser Kapitalverschwendung. Der Umbruch von herkömmlicher Großrechner-EDV zur Mikroelektronik bedeutet nicht nur das Umsteigen von einer alten Hilfstechnik auf eine modernere Form. Das Vordringen der Personalcomputer verändert in erheblichem Umfang Organisationsstrukturen und damit auch Verhaltensweisen. Um diese Umbruchsituation aus der Sicht eines Verantwortlichen in einem Betrieb oder in der Verwaltung in den Griff zu bekommen, ist ein ganzheitlicher Denkansatz erforderlich. Dies bedeutet, daß nicht die Auseinandersetzung mit technischen Ausprägungen weiterhilft, sondern nur die übergeordnete Betrachtung im Sinne eines ‘Informationsmanagements’ inmitten einer sich immer starker vernetzenden Welt. (CAG) Other inferrers of this type are based around verbs of showing such as zeigen or signalisieren: Die Schüler kamen über die Beschreibung des deutschen Werbespots sehr schnell zu der Erkenntnis, daß hier negative Charakterzüge und abschreckende Verhaltensweisen dargestellt werden. Das Ende des Werbespots fand wie erwartet ein positives Echo. Der junge Mann wurde ‘als typischer Ostfriese’ halb belächelt, halb bedauert, insgesamt als Sympathieträger betrachtet: Il est sympathique; cela arrive, on fait des fautes. Heftig reagierten die Schüler auf die Frage, inwiefern die gezeigten Verhaltensweisen ‘typisch deutsch’ seien, indem sie vehement vertraten: Ce sont seulement des préjugés. C’est le cliché de l’homme conservateur. Dies zeigt, daß die Werbestrategie auch bei ihnen ‘wirkt’: Niemand möchte so sein, wie die dargestellten Charaktere, ja, man möchte noch nicht einmal mit solchen die gleiche Nationalität vertreten. (CAG) Man wird schließlich auch in der Lagerhaltung risikoreichen Stoffen eine besondere Aufmerksamkeit widmen müssen, besondere Kontrollmechanismen einführen und Risiken abzusichern haben. In der Summe signalisiert all dies, daß wir zwar direkt vor einem Müllnotstand, aber erst am Anfang des Aufbaus einer komplexen Entsorgungs-, Verwertungs-und Deponiewirtschaft stehen. (CAG) 4.3.1.4 English, French and German inferrers based on verba dicendi in comparative perspective Many of the inferrers discussed here display total or partial equivalence in function with at least one item in the other two languages. Thus, it shows that is equivalent to cela/ce qui montre que and dies zeigt, dass; this is not to say that corresponds to cela n’est pas pour dire que (etc.) and damit soll nicht

< previous page

page_228

next page >

< previous page

page_229

next page >

Page 229 gesagt sein or dies bedeutet allerdings nicht, dass, and so on. It is hardly necessary to discuss such obvious correspondences in detail. Sometimes, however, the equivalence relationship may, for all practical purposes, be total while at the same time being subject to usage and frequency restrictions. Thus, this means that has a direct equivalent in French cela signifie/υeut dire que and German das heiβt/besagt, das. Yet frequency data suggest that English this means that is used in a wider variety of contexts than its direct French and German equivalents. Since words obtain their meaning from context, this means that may thus be said to have a broader, or more inclusive, meaning than its French and German counterparts. There is clear evidence that English readily admits such ‘fuzzy’ SLDMs as this means that even in contexts where ‘hard’ scientific facts are discussed. Not so in German and French, where such contexts require use of more specific SLDMs. This can be illustrated with an example from the Multiconcord corpus (see Table 4.87; since the French passage was not available, I have provided the French translation myself). Another subtle but significant difference concerns the combination of first-level markers and SLDMs. A thin line separates English from French and German to the extent that English this is not to say that very rarely cooccurs with an adversative first-level marker, whereas French and German markers with a similar function do so in at least 50 per cent of cases. Thus, syntagmas such as ce n ‘est pas dire cependant que and dies bedeutet allerdings nicht, dass should normally be rendered by a mere this is not to say that . French c’est dire is often matched by the inferential modes of in other words and mit anderen Worten, which were discussed in the section on reformulators. Another potential English equivalent of French c’est dire is in effect, especially in conjunction with therefore; in German this may be rendered by man sieht also, dass or es zeigt sich also, dass: Since a wide latitude was allowed in interpreting the holy books, and clever dialecticians could find in the Vedas any doctrine which they sought, the only practical requirement for intellectual respectability Table 4.87 this means and two non-literal French and German equivalents English French German The theory also tells us that Selon cette théorie, rien n’est plus rapide Die Theorie besagt, daß nichts nothing can travel faster than light. que la lumière. On peut en conclure qu’il schneller als das Licht sein kann. This means that the path of any faut représenter par une ligne le chemin Daraus folgt, daß jeder Weg eines object through space and time parcouru par un objet à travers l’espace- Objektes durch Raum und Zeit durch must be represented by a line… temps. (my translation) eine Linie repräsentiert werden muß…

< previous page

page_229

next page >

< previous page

page_230

next page >

Page 230 was the recognition of caste; this being the real government of India, rejection of it was treason, and acceptance of it covered a multitude of sins. In effect, therefore, the philosophers of India enjoyed far more liberty than their Scholastic analogues in Europe, though less, perhaps, than the thinkers of Christendom under the enlightened Popes of the Renaissance. (CAE) Conversely, autrement dit may serve as a translation of this implies that in contexts such as the following: It is no accident that the three middle ear bones, the hammer, the anvil, and the stirrup, are the only bones that are fully developed at birth. Children, therefore, listen before they speak. Research has shown that children who do not develop proficiency in language during the first years of life are up to six times more likely to experience reading problems when they go to school (Clay, 1990). This implies that parents are, essentially, children’s first reading teachers. (CAE) I argued in Chapter 1 that economists assume rationality not because it is true but because it is useful; people are in part rational, and it is their rationality that provides the predictable element in their behavior. This implies that irrationality is not very useful, since it is unpredictable, but not that it does not exist. (CAE) Alternatively, cela υeut dire que or de cela il découle que could be used in such cases. One of the less obvious equivalences suggested by our monolingual investigations is that between the absolute mode of c’est dire and its comparatively more complex English and German equivalents (see Table 4.88). A switch from nominal to verbal constructions is made necessary by English nominal constructions based on a general abstract noun with an inferential meaning (e.g. the conclusion is that ). French and German do not allow ‘bare’ nominal constructions of the type *la conclusion est que (despite the existence of la condusion de ce qui précède est que ) or *die FolTable 4.88 The absolute mode of c’est dire and its English and German equivalents English French German that’s saying something c’est dire das sagt schon alles; damit ist schon alles gesagt; dem ist nichts hinzuzufügen; das will schon was heißen

< previous page

page_230

next page >

< previous page

page_231

next page >

Page 231 gerung ist, dass, but equivalence may be established by recourse to the corresponding verbs conclure and folgern (or folgen). Some possible equivalents based on these verbs are listed in Tables 4.91 and 4.93. Only a very few language-specific items come under the scope of zero equivalence. Such is the case with English and French two-part sentences involving pre-predicate infinitive clauses (to say…is to say; dire…, c’est dire), the stylistic value of which is impossible to render in German. German may resort to nominalization of the first infinitive, maintaining a verbal construction for the second; alternatively, relative or conditional clauses could be used: Die Aussage, dass…bedeutet, dass Wer behauptet, dass…meint zugleich, dass Würde man behaupten, dass…so wäre dies sicherlich…(CAG) 4.3.2 Suggestive inferrers This is a fairly productive set of discourse devices, not least because its members show a considerable degree of overlap with the large set of SLDMs functioning as suggestors. Suggestive inferrers of this type provide an assessment of a situation as obvious or introduce an important fact directly inferrable from the previous discourse. This can be easily seen from the fact that many of the adjectivally or nominally based inferrers can be rephrased as stance or linking adverbials in English: it is easy to see that →obυiously, it comes as no surprise that →not surprisingly/unsurprisingly, etc. Suggestive inferrers may be further subdivided into two major categories: (a) inferrers based on the notion of ‘lack of surprise’ and (b) inferrers based on the notion of ‘ease of perception or understanding’. A Table 4.89 Inferrers expressing ‘lack of surprise’ English French German it therefore comes as no rien d’étonnant donc es überrascht daher a surprise that ce que wenig, dass it is no surprise, then, that il n’est donc pas es verwundert daher nicht, surprenant que dass it is not surprising, then, that (il n’est) pas étonnant es ist daher wenig dans ces conditions überraschend, dass que not surprisingly, then, not unnaturally on ne s’étonnera pas es kann daher kaum dans ces conditions überraschen, dass de unsurprisingly (voir/lire/…) es ist kein Wunder, dass obviously, then, clearly, therefore, plainly, then, manifestly, il est clair que es ist somit verständlich/ therefore, il est donc normal/ einsichtig, dass logique/…que vor diesem Hintergrund ist es nur allzu verständlich, dass

< previous page

page_231

next page >

< previous page

page_232

next page >

Page 232 specificity of the latter type of inferrer is that it tends to co-occur with first-level markers or other devices signalling inference, such as the first-level marker then or the future tense in English, or the future or future perfect tenses in French. Table 4.89 overviews the first subcategory. As Table 4.89 suggests, it is fairly easy to establish correspondences among the languages under investigation. The French phrases offer the greatest variability, with the canonical rien d’étonnant (donc) à ce que being transmuted to rien d’étonnant si, il n’est alors (donc) pas étonnant que, aussi n’est-il pas étonnant de υoir, quoi d’étonnant alors si, rien d’étonnant des lors (alors) que and rien d’étonnant, par consequent, si. An infinitive construction introduced by the verb υoir may replace the complement clause preceded by the conjunction que —a common syntactic device in well-written discursive or analytic prose. Thus, the following example may be reworded as ‘aussi n’est-il pas étonnant que la reproduction sexuée soit apparue…’: La reproduction sexuée est donc une source presque inépuisable de variation. C’est elle qui a permis l’immense variété des formes vivantes. Aussi n’est-il pas étonnant de voir apparaître la reproduction sexuée très précocement au cours de l’évolution. (EU) Apart from the usual differences in verb valency ( es überrascht nicht vs. it is not surprising that [*it does not surprise that] vs. il n’est donc pas surprenant que [*il ne surprend pas que]), another translation difficulty may arise from the fact that English and German have no direct equivalent for il est donc normal que . Other adjectives must be substituted for normal to produce an acceptable English or German sentence. Table 4.90 Inferrers expressing ‘ease of perception’ English French German it will be (readily) seen that on comprendra/ constatera/ Man sieht, dass Man erkennt, dass écrira/ it is easy to see, then, that with this in view, it can mesurera/verra alors il nous es ist unschwer zu sehen be seen at once that this shows apparaîtra alors que (erkennen), dass on voit a partir de Y que , on es wird mittlerweile wohl l’aura compris, ersichtlich geworden sein, dass the observant/careful/ attentive/…reader will notice relevè/perçu (etc.) on voit (note) that (bien)+NP/+que le lecteur l’aura remarque/ es dürfte aufgefallen sein, dass aussi peut-on dire on es ist somit verständlich/ comprend einsichtig, dass on constate hier (dabei, darin) zeigt sich hier (dabei, damit) wird deutlich

< previous page

page_232

next page >

< previous page

page_233

next page >

Page 233 We now come to the second subcategory, of which Table 4.90 presents a detailed picture. Whereas the English inferrers in this group are self-explanatory, this is somewhat less obvious for some of the French and German inferrers which lack an overt marker of their inferential nature, such as on υoit que, on comprend que or man sieht, dass. Yet their inferential nature is clearly visible from an example such as the following: Ainsi se crée l’unité: ce type de vers s’appelle fornyrdislag (mètre des chants anciens), málaháttr (mode des dits) ou ljódaháttr (mode des lais), selon qu’en outre on compte ou non les syllabes de chaque vers et que l’on combine les métres entre eux. Un autre type fréquent, le galdralag (mètre des incantations) ajoute d’autres procédés: répétitions de mots ou de tournures, parallélismes de constructions. On voit que rien n’est plus concerté que cet art absurdement qualifié autrefois de «barbare». (EU) What sometimes makes it even more difficult to recognize such items as inferrers is their combinability with noun objects: Ce que Marcel Granet écrit des Chinois, qui se servent des nombres pour exprimer les ‘qualités’ de certains groupements ou pour indiquer une ‘ordonnance hiérarchique’, concerne aussi bien la vision des Pythagoriciens que des mathématiciens sus-nommés. On voit l’intérêt qu’il y aurait à s’informer de la ‘sainte Tétraktys’ de Pythagore, ou du ‘dieu géomètre’ de Platon, sous les feux convergents du Taote-King et des théories de Heisenberg. (CAF) Some inferrers in this category have highly idiosyncratic uses and cannot be translated using standard items from the other languages. Thus, French on aura alors may precede a statement indicating the results of a particular procedure: L’objectif final (pour les enfants) était d’élire la phrase la plus ‘drôle’. A un niveau plus élevé, on peut utiliser la technique du cadavre exquis sans préciser aux élèves de s’entendre sur le nombre du sujet et du verbe: on aura alors forcement des phrases mal accordées. (CAF) In this case, the best English equivalent would probably be this would giυe us . The same applies to on écrira alors: Plus précisément, on suppose que, si la distance entre s et z est inférieure à 100 grades, le sujet a une probabilité faible de détecter la lacune. On appelle…l’événement «détection» à l’essai n, et… l’événement «non détection», on écrira alors, avec…: (EU)

< previous page

page_233

next page >

< previous page

page_234

next page >

Page 234 Two definers which may equally well be described as highly idiosyncratic inferrers are on parlera alors and on dira alors: Si nous faisons maintenant correspondre les éléments de V 2 aux éléments de V 1 de telle sorte qu’aux éléments de V 1 pour lesquels valent les relations R, R’,…, correspondent toujours les éléments de V 2 pour lesquels valent les relations homologues, on dira alors que les deux domaines d’objets sont entre eux isomorphes et que donc, en ce sens, la variété projective à deux dimensions et la variété continue des couleurs sont isomorphes. (CAF) The reason why German appears to use less one-word connectors in combination with these SLDMs than French may be that an explicit anaphoric link is enabled through the use of pronominal adverbs: hier/darin/…zeigt sich, dass. A final point to be noted is that French inferrers of this type may involve direct reader address (le lecteur l’aura remarque), a usage which is dated for English and German inferrers. 4.3.3 Two-element inferrers This set contains a large number of sentence-fragment inferrers consisting of two distinct elements: one is a verb or adjective phrase indicating inference or certainty, the other is a noun phrase referring back to the previous discourse as the basis for the inference about to be made. The noun phrase is usually embedded in a prepositional phrase introduced by from in English, by de or d’après in French and by aus or nach in German. The second element may be left implicit, as in it follows that and nous concluons que . Two-element inferrers are equally common in all three languages and are functionally equivalent. Once again, French displays greater transformation potential than English and German, allowing also the verbal or adjectival element to be left implicit in the inferrers d’après ce qui précède or d’après ces obserυations. An example: Volcanisme aérien et volcanisme sous-marin [sub-heading, D.S.] Les verres basaltiques, d’après ce qui précède, ne peuvent manifestement apparaître et subsister qu’à la faveur de circonstances exceptionnelles. (EU) It is interesting to note that the SLDMs in question have several different syntactic realizations, and that these realizations occur with differing frequencies in each language. Group 1 (see Table 4.91) is based on verbs occurring with impersonal it/il/es and usually accompanied by a prepositional phrase. Group 2 (see Table 4.92) usually takes the form impersonal it+adjec-

< previous page

page_234

next page >

< previous page

page_235

next page >

Page 235 Table 4.91 Two-element inferrers based on impersonal constructions English French German it follows (from this) that from here il s’ensuit de là que daraus/hieraus folgt, daß daraus ergibt sich/daraus it follows that it follows from the il en découle/résulte geht hervor, daß above discussion/the foregoing that que daraus resultiert, daß d’où il résulte que aus dem bisher Gesagten/ dem Vorangehenden/ dem de cela il résulte/ Ausgeführten/ meiner Darstellung/den bisherigen découle que Überlegungen geht hervor/ergibt sich/ dürfte hervorgehen, de tout quoi il daß ressort que il ressort (clairement/à l’évidence) de ce qui précède que il résulte de ce qui précède que il résulte des réflexions qu’on vient de lire que de ces différents facteurs, il résulte que des paragraphes précédents, comme des précédents chapitres, il résulte que il découle de ce qui précède que il découle de ces constatations que Table 4.92 Two-element inferrers based on it/il/es +adjective phrase+ that-clause English French German it is apparent/certain/ clear/evident/ d’après ce qui precede/ de ce qui précède/à somit ist klar, daß manifest/ obvious/ plain (etc.) (from this) la lumière de ce qui précède, il est clair que nach dem Gesagten ist (es) that il est évident, dans ces conditions, que klar/offenbar, daß it will have become clear from the d’après ces observations …, was aus dem bisher preceding section that Gesagten klar geworden sein it should have become plain that (etc.) dürfte tive phrase+prepositional phrase+ that -clause-complement (analogously for the other languages under survey). This pattern has been omitted from Francis et al. (1998). Group 3 (see Table 4.93) is based on verbs that may take prepositional phrases as optional complements. Members of this group may occur in personal active or impersonal passive constructions. In English, this type

< previous page

page_235

next page >

< previous page

page_236

next page >

Page 236 Table 4.93 Two-element inferrers based on verbs English we (must) conclude that we (must) conclude from this/from the findings that it is concluded from this research review that [context: abstract]

such as conclude, υoir and entnehmen French German on voit d’après ce qui précède que wir entnehmen daraus, nous voyons, d’après ces exemples, que daß De ce qui précède, on déduit daraus schließen wir, daß (immédiatement) que daraus läßt sich nous pouvons donc conclure que entnehmen, daß concluons que daraus ist zu on est fondé à conclure schlussfolgern, daß (croire/penser/retenir) que daraus ist zu schließen, on peut en conclure que daß d’où l’on peut conclure que on reconnaîtra de la sorte que que nous aboutissons a l’idée suivante of inferrer is notably uncommon. The verbs infer, deduce and conclude are far more commonly used to draw conclusions from the research of others rather than the writer’s own. Witness the following example: Institutionalist economists might conclude from this comparison that the differences in their economic performance is due to differences in their institutions that have arisen as a result of non-culturally-related factors, such as the fact that Hong Kong was, until recently, a British colony. (CAE) Group 4 (see Table 4.94) comprises nominal constructions involving nouns such as English conclusion, French conclusion and German Schluβfol-gerung or Folgerung. Group 5 (see Table 4.95) contains inferrers consisting of the following two elements: 1 A noun phrase with an abstract noun as its head. The abstract noun functions as the clause subject. It is often derived from a verb designating an academic procedure or method, thereby expressing a process meaning. The following English nouns offer a fairly representative sampling of the noun class in question: comparison, data, findings, examination, investigation, look, results, study.

< previous page

page_236

next page >

< previous page

page_237

next page >

Page 237 Table 4.94 Two-element inferrers based on nouns English French German the conclusion from all of this la conclusion a tirer de ce qui precede, c’est que die Schlußfolgerung is that la conclusion provisoire de ce qui précéde est que liegt nahe, daß the overall conclusion from les constatations suivantes s’imposent après lecture des meine Schlußfolgerung this discussion is that exemples ci-dessus conclusion attristante, mais incontournable: aus the most plausible conclusions …lautet so: die from this analysis are that vorläufige Schlußfolgerung lautet daher, daß damit drängt sich die Schlußfolgerung auf, daß daraus ergibt sich die Schlußfolgerung, daß Daraus läßt sich die Folgerung ableiten, daß als Folgerung für… ergibt sich, daß Table 4.95 Two-element inferrers based on noun+verb collocations English French German the investigation of… shows l’analyse de…re Die Untersuchung von… zeigt the comparison… suggests la comparaison…met en évidence Der Vergleich…läßt erkennen a scrutiny of this list will show tout ce qui précède montre que dies läßt darauf schließen, daß consideration of the examples shows cet ensemble de données dies läßt den Schluß zu, daß that autorisait…une série dies hat zur Folge, daß an examination of… makes it clear/plain/ de conclusions dies hat den Effekt, daß apparent that cela se traduit par die Untersuchung erlaubt daher die this gives us ce qui donne Schlußfolgerung, daß …legt die Schlußfolgerung nahe, daß 2 A verb indicating a logical relation between the subject and the object or nominal clause which follows the verb. The process expressed by the subject forms the basis of, or provides evidence for, the statements of truth contained in the object or nominal clause. The following English sample may be considered representative of the verb class under discussion: afford, allow, confirm, indicate, mean, proυe, reυeal, reflect, show, suggest, support, permit and yield. In German the abstract noun phrase may also occur within a prepositional phrase placed in clause-initial position, as seen in the following:

< previous page

page_237

next page >

< previous page

page_238

next page >

Page 238 Durch dieses Ergebnis wird die Vorstellung nahegelegt, dass (Sachtleber 1993:74) Im einzelsprachlichen Vergleich zeigt sich, dass (CAG) This is because German is a fixed-word-order language which shows a partiality for clause-initial prepositional phrases expressing circumstances (e.g. cause). 4.3.4 Summary Inferrers provide transition from one or more statements considered as true to another, the truth of which is believed to follow from the former. Our distinction between three types of inferrers yielded the following results: • Most inferrers based on υerba dicendi display total or partial equivalence with at least one item in the other languages (e.g. this is not to say that →cela n’est pas pour dire que ). Sometimes such equivalence may, for all practical purposes, be total while at the same time being subject to usage and frequency restrictions. The English inferrer this is not to say that, for instance, rarely collocates with an adversative first-level marker, whereas French and German markers with a similar function do so in at least 50 per cent of cases. Thus, syntagmas such as ce n ‘est pas dire cependant que should normally be rendered by a mere this is not to say that . • Suggestive inferrers provide an assessment of a situation as obvious or introduce an important fact directly inferrable from the previous discourse. Correspondences between languages are fairly easy to establish, although subject to differences in verb valency ( es überrascht also nicht, dass vs. il n’est donc pas surprenant que [*il ne surprend pas que] ) and adjective choice (il est donc normal que →es ist somit einsichtig, dass). • The closest similarities between the languages under survey were found to exist among two-element inferrers. Two-element inferrers were so called because they consist of a verb or adjective phrase indicating inference or certainty and a noun phrase referring back to the previous discourse (e.g. it is concluded from this research that ). Although French two-element inferrers display greater transformation potential than their English and German counterparts, allowing also the verbal or adjectival element to be left implicit (d’après ce qui précède), equivalence relations can be established on the basis of categorization into five types. A minor complication is that some subtypes occur with differing frequencies in the languages under investigation.

< previous page

page_238

next page >

< previous page

page_239

next page >

Page 239 4.4 Summary and conclusion This chapter has been concerned with identifying a large number of functionally specific SLDMs and analysing their syntactic, semantic and pragmatic properties with a view to establishing translational equivalences. The lexicographic harvest has been particularly rich: a host of moderately or highly common expressions can be found in the preceding pages, most of which have so far gone unrecorded in the monolingual and bilingual lexicography of English, French and German. Close comparison of these monolingual lists has opened our eyes to previously unthought-of equivalents that should find their way into the dictionary (see Part II). It has also been shown that descriptive approaches such as RST would have to be extended to permit a detailed account of the rhetorical relations encoded by a number of SLDMs. For some of the categories under investigation, it has been found empirically that French SLDMs outnumber those available in English and German, thereby confirming a tendency that authors such as Vinay and Darbelnet (1958) and Grieve (1996) have posited for first-level markers. Not only does French stand out as particularly rich in SLDMs, but it also offers greater stylistic variability and elegance, often replacing an object complement clause by an object noun phrase (on υoit que NP est important →on υoit l’importance de NP) . It has been shown that interlingual differences may sometimes be very wide, as when there is an equivalence relationship between first-level and second-level markers. One example among many is the translation of French cela dit by German allerdings. An even more striking instance was afforded by such French restaters as disons-nous, which give rise to quite distinct linguistic environments difficult to imitate in English and German. At other times the differences have been found to be fairly small, but they nevertheless give rise to serious translation problems. This has been illustrated with SLDMs formed from nouns such as example, exemple and Beispiel, which show extremely subtle divergences in their collocational patterns. Even where the languages under investigation offer clear similarities, straightforward equivalences have sometimes been found to be barred for reasons of frequency. The zero connector is a case in point. For some types of reformulation zero usage has been shown to be more frequent than the use of a marker. From a lexicological point of view, there has been ample evidence of collocational phenomena which have not yet received their fair share of attention from linguists. It was shown, for example, that adverbial markers such as υoire and carrément, as well as phrasemes such as with this in mind and let us turn to, may exhibit a statistically significant frequency of co-occurrence. It has been noted by several authors that some first-level markers put in place either paradigmatic relationships which make two successive

< previous page

page_239

next page >

< previous page

page_240

next page >

Page 240 sentences the evocation of a whole and of one of its elements or syntagmatic relationships that make one sentence the background of another (MacNamara 1995; Blumenthal 1980). The same method of categorization has been found to have applicability to the SLDMs discussed here: while exemplifiers mark a paradigmatic relationship, reformulators and inferrers mark a syntagmatic relationship. Another fact of general intralingual as well as interlingual importance concerns correspondences between nominal and verbal SLDMs such as the implication is that and this implies that . These equivalences were first noted by Gallagher (1992). It should be borne in mind, however, that they are far from perfect, as seen with this suggests that and the suggestion is that, where the former comes within the province of inferrers while the latter is a suggestor. A relatively significant tendency emerging from our analysis is that English and especially French build up a large number of SLDMs using lexically variable nominal patterns, where German exhibits a partiality for relatively fixed verbal structures. A clear example is provided by restrictors introducing an adverse point such as a complication is that vs. erschwerend kommt hinzu, dass . Such findings appear to contradict the widely held view that German is generally more nominal in style than English. A final point to be noted is the implicit assumption in much of the literature (e.g. Grote et al. 1997; Fraser 1998) that a typical sentence will contain just one discourse marker cuing only one relation. The reality has been found to be different from this: first, one-word and second-level markers may occur in one sentence; second, two discourse markers both from the same category ( that said and howeυer ) and from different categories ( c’est-à-dire and finalement ) may be used together; third, as already mentioned, some such co-occurrences form strong collocations: with this in mind+let us revisit, υoire+franchement/carrément, c’est-à-dire+en l’occur-rence, to name but a few. A word in conclusion about the pedagogic potential of SLDMs. It appears from the findings just presented that, being neither totally fixed nor totally variable, most SLDMs occupy a fairly central position on the phraseological cline and can thus be used by teachers of composition and translation to illustrate a number of general features of each language under discussion (Siepmann 2001a). Knowledge about such productive patterns is indispensable for the second-language learner: writing native-like prose is not simply a matter of constructing well-formed sentences but of using common lexical clusters in a contextually and functionally appropriate manner.

< previous page

page_240

next page >

< previous page

page_241

next page >

Page 241 Part II A contrastive interlanguage analysis with implications for dictionary making

< previous page

page_241

next page >

< previous page

page_242

next page >

page_242

next page >

Page 242 This page intentionally left blank.

< previous page

< previous page

page_243

next page >

Page 243 1 Introduction Viele Studenten bleiben bei ihren Abiturkenntnissen stehen, weil sie nicht begriffen haben, daß man dem Wortschatz nur geduldig, fleißig, kontinuierlich und bienenhaft beikommen kann… Aber ist ein schöneres Leben vorstellbar als summend von Blüte zu Blüte zu fliegen, den Nektar des Wortschatzes einzusammeln und gelegentlich den zu stechen, der einen daran hindern will?1 Franz-Josef Hausmann, ‘Was ist eigentlich Wortschatz?’ There has recently been a surge of interest in phraseology by linguists and language pedagogues alike. Fuelling this has been the realization that ritualized phrases are a common feature of everyday conversation (Wilkins 1976) and that a high percentage of spoken and written text is made up of recurrent patterns which constitute single choices for the language user (Gross 1988; Sinclair 1991; Feilke 1996). Computer-based analyses of large amounts of data have cemented this newly emergent picture of language, especially with regard to English (e.g. Sinclair 1991; Howarth 1996; Moon 1998; Biber et al. 1999; Hunston and Francis 2000) and French (Siepmann 1999; Gréciano 2000). Part I of the present research has gone some way towards further filling in the picture; there it was seen that both academics and journalists cherish a specific type of conventionalized multi-word unit which I have called the ‘second-level discourse marker’, or ‘SLDM’ for short. If multi-word units are so pervasive a feature of language then we would expect them to be given adequate treatment in lexicography as well as in language and translation teaching. This is far from the case, however: as Lewis (1993:93) points out, multi-word items are still seriously undervalued in ESL teaching. SLDMs in particular do not receive any mention in current syllabuses and textbooks. It is no great exaggeration to say that, probably due to the absence of linguistic descriptions in this area, SLDMs have completely escaped the attention of teachers and language pedagogues alike. This is just one aspect of the still-fashionable neglect of language form in ‘communicative’ or ‘neocommunicative’ language

< previous page

page_243

next page >

< previous page

page_244

next page >

Page 244 teaching; it is not without its effects on non-native writing, from which some types of SLDMs are notoriously absent, as will be shown below. It is the aim of Part II to provide a basis for rectifying this deficiency. After a general introduction to interlanguage analysis, Chapter 2 will therefore undertake an empirical comparison of the phraseological performance of native and non-native writers with a view to detecting gaps in the latter’s knowledge of SLDMs which dictionary makers and designers of teaching materials should take into account. An analysis will be made of SLDM frequency in a native and a non-native (‘interlanguage’) corpus; this will be supplemented by an investigation into typical errors in SLDM use. It goes without saying that this study of writer and translator performance involves a departure from the nondirectional methodology used elsewhere in this work—a move which is self-explanatory. The combined insights gleaned from this study of writer performance on the one hand, and the linguistic analysis undertaken in Part I on the other hand, then lead to suggestions for the improvement of monolingual and bilingual dictionaries in Chapter 3. To conclude, Chapter 4 discusses avenues for further research.

< previous page

page_244

next page >

< previous page

page_245

next page >

Page 245 2 Facing realities The performance of non-native writers and translators Although there is a vast body of literature on interlanguage (for an overview, see Ellis 1985, 1994), as well as a burgeoning interest in the assessment of text quality (Hamp-Lyons 1991; Adam 1998; Coulthard 1994a; Ferrari and Manzotti 1998; House 1997; Reboul and Moeschler 1998), the evaluation of professional and semi-professional nonnative speaker writings, as published in journals, books and Internet archives, is only now beginning to attract scholarly attention. This chapter aims to make a small contribution to this new area of research; the largest part of the chapter is taken up with what Granger (1998a:12–13) has termed a ‘contrastive interlanguage analysis’, meaning a comparison of native and non-native speaker performance. This kind of analysis is in tune with the broad thrust of research on interlanguage, which recently began to avail itself of purpose-built learner corpora (Greenbaum 1992; Granger 1993, 1998a, 1998b; Lindner 1994; Granger and Tyson 1996; Ringbom 1996, 1998; Hyland and Milton 1997; Lorenz 1997; Milton 1999).1 While early error analysis focused on learner difficulties in expressing referential meaning, interlanguage research can now give proper consideration to textual and pragmatic aspects as well as to the representation of particular target-language features in non-native discourse. Section 2.1 discusses issues associated with the analysis of interlanguage in greater detail, the main argument being that the advent of large corpora allows us to describe error and deviation in interlanguage with unprecedented precision. This is illustrated through the analysis of textual inadequacies in a sample text by a German writer of English. What a brief study of sample texts cannot bring to light, however, is the extent of over- and under-representation of target-language features in non-native text; Section 2.2 therefore undertakes a detailed contrastive interlanguage analysis including frequency counts. To keep the scope of this analysis within manageable limits, the main focus throughout the section is on German writers’ use of those English SLDMs that were discussed in meticulous detail in Part I. Discourse markers are expressions almost ‘universally presented as typically native-like’ (Granger 1998b), so that an investigation into this area of usage may well lay bare typical errors

< previous page

page_245

next page >

< previous page

page_246

next page >

Page 246 and, more importantly, general patterns of over-use or under-use, thereby providing clues to the learning needs of German-speaking learners of English which lexicographers need to be alerted to (see Chapter 3). Section 2.3 illustrates how translators may fail to provide adequate target-language renditions of SLDMs. To conclude, Section 2.4 reviews the main findings and briefly explores implications for language learning. 2.1 Interlanguage analysis As the term suggests, the learner’s ‘interlanguage’ occupies an intermediate position between his or her native language and the target language (e.g. Croft 1980:87); it may exhibit features which exist neither in the former nor in the latter (Selinker 1992). A detailed understanding of interlanguage systems is necessary to enable language teachers and curriculum designers to make principled teaching decisions. In particular, they need information about the stages that learners pass through as they develop a growing command of the target language, the difficulties and errors associated with each learning stage, the role of the mother tongue in the learning process and the psycholinguistic processes and strategies underlying it. As the aim of the present chapter is to investigate non-native deviation in the use of English SLDMs, this section will restrict itself to certain aspects of interlanguage analysis as practised in the aforementioned corpus-based studies of learner language, where the analysis of linguistic and statistical deviation from target-language norms is paramount. For obvious reasons, it will not consider the wider issues of psycholinguistic processes and strategies which figure large in studies of second language acquisition. 2.1.1 Error analysis In the early days of language pedagogy it was hypothesized that learner difficulties and errors could be predicted and/or diagnosed by means of contrastive analyses of the learner’s mother tongue and the target language (e.g. Lado 1957). However, there had always been an empirically grounded view among the language teaching community that not all errors and points of difficulty were the result of mother tongue interference, as the strong form of the ‘contrastive analysis hypothesis’ claimed (Ellis 1985). Apart from mother tongue interference, errors were known to be attributable to non-contrastive causes, such as intralingual asymmetries, as well as a multiplicity of psychological and social causes (James 1980:146). Thus contrastive analysis could at best be regarded as a diagnostic tool for identifying errors caused by interference, but no predictive capacity could be ascribed to it. Underlying contrastive analysis was a behaviourist view of learning

< previous page

page_246

next page >

< previous page

page_247

next page >

Page 247 which saw errors as undesirable. Corder (1967) was the first to propose a radically different view of language learning in line with the mentalist account of first-language acquisition given by Chomsky. In this view, which was soon to win almost universal acceptance, errors are held to be evidence of the learner acting as a ‘hypothesis tester’ who constructs successively more appropriate internal representations of the target language. The making of errors is thus reinterpreted not only as a necessary part of both first-language and second-language acquisition but as an important source of information about the learner’s developmental sequence. Corder’s 1967 article gave powerful impetus to the study of learner errors, which now became almost a discipline in its own right. Although error analysis had long been practised in haphazard or ad hoc fashion by language teachers and linguists, no uniform methodology had evolved. Corder (1974) tried to fill this gap by proposing the following procedure: • Selection of a corpus. • Identification of errors in the corpus. (Corder [1967, 1971] introduced the useful distinction between systematic errors that reflect the learner’s stage of development and mistakes or lapses which occur as a result of performance factors such as fatigue or memory limitations.) • Classification of errors. • Identification of error causes. • Evaluation of the seriousness of errors. (This last step is redundant if the purpose of the error analysis is to research SLA rather than to arrive at principled teaching decisions.) 2.1.2 Towards corpus-informed interlanguage analysis Corder’s brand of error analysis helped to provide a systematic framework for a host of investigations into particular aspects of interlanguage. However, the limitations of error analysis soon became apparent. Probably the most serious is that it is restricted to only a small part of the learner’s overall performance in the target language. Simply put, it limits itself to what learners cannot do while disregarding what they can do and the ways in which they do it. It also neglects the role of what Hammerly (1991) has called ‘intrusive interference’, leading to the avoidance or under-use of particular structures. Such under-use is a common feature of interlanguage at all stages of the learning process (Hammerly 1991; James 1994). Another limitation of early attempts at error analysis (one which, incidentally, still besets the treatment of error at secondary school level and beyond) was that errors above the sentence level and pragmatic errors were not taken account of (Gabel 2000:86). However, this deficiency has now been partly remedied by pragmatic approaches to text assessment (e.g. House 1997) and corpus-based interlanguage studies encompassing textual and pragmatic aspects (e.g. Hyland and Milton 1997).

< previous page

page_247

next page >

< previous page

page_248

next page >

Page 248 A further point where modern interlanguage theory parts company with traditional error analysis regards problems of causal attribution and evaluation. Analysts who rely solely on the written production of their observees cannot ascribe errors to clearly definable causes with any confidence, and will tend to overrate the number of interference errors. To remedy this problem, traditional product-centred error analysis has sometimes been combined with process-centred ‘error protocols’ (e.g. Krings 1986, 1987). It then appears that learner responses can be placed on a continuum ranging from total awareness of committing an error to total unawareness (Siepmann 1996:72), and that error causes span the entire spectrum from ‘unthinking application of fossilized rules to active guessing strategies’ (Krings 1987:77). Since the learner corpus used in the present study was constructed from texts freely available on the World Wide Web, such elicitation of error protocols was not feasible and causal attribution of errors was effected on the basis of the analyst’s experience. Evaluation, in the sense of classifying errors by gravity, is an equally speculative matter. Unlike early studies of evaluation which sought to establish a single hierarchy of errors on the basis of isolated sentences, Vann et al. (1991:186ff.) showed that different criteria may result in different hierarchies. When their respondents—faculty members at an American university—judged the acceptability of the written output of non-native students, spelling errors were found to be the least serious, followed by article errors, whereas wrong verb forms were viewed most critically. By contrast, when the same respondents were asked about the carefulness of the student writers, spelling errors were seen as most serious, followed by errors in verb form and article errors. Vann et al. (1991) also found a significant correlation between academic discipline and acceptance of language errors, with science faculty reacting more critically than their counterparts in the humanities. There was also some evidence to suggest that the greater examiners’ exposure to the writing of non-native speakers, the greater their tolerance of errors. Unfortunately, the study confined itself to the aforementioned errors, excluding, for example, collocational errors or errors in themerheme arrangement. A common-sense approach to error gravity would evaluate errors in terms of their communicative effect. Henschelmann’s (1988) classification system of translation errors is based on this insight; it might be transposed to the analysis of texts by non-natives. The system distinguishes between Abweichungsfehler ( errors or defects ) and Störungsfehler ( disturbances or malfunctions ). Abweichungsfehler occur when there is ‘a difference between the observed state (learner text) and a/the optimum state of the target text’. More specifically, errors and defects concern just one particular grammatical or pragmatic feature, such as tense or verb valency; they do not adversely affect the communicative goal. Disturbances, on the other hand, are ‘more or less extensive dysfunctionalities thwarting the communicative goal’,

< previous page

page_248

next page >

< previous page

page_249

next page >

Page 249 and malfunctions are diagnosed when one or more of the communicative functions of the target text have not been fulfilled. Other criticisms of error analysis concern its linguistic underpinnings. Legenhausen (1989) typifies this line of criticism, which seems to have lost some of its validity in the age of corpus-based analysis. He discusses linguistic and human factors which make it difficult to identify errors in the first place, claiming that the definition of error as a deviation from standard language is not viable because there is no universally accepted standard and because deviation is ‘essentially a matter of degree’ (Legenhausen 1989:47). This is because, he rightly argues, lexicogrammatical structures themselves make up continua with more or less fixed end-points. Although his arguments are theoretically sound and his examples well-chosen, Legenhausen somewhat overstates the significance of lexico-grammatical fuzziness in error identification. Several objections to his position may be raised. First, the overwhelming majority of errors committed by learners at all stages of language learning are anything but border-line cases. This becomes clear when we look at such collections of learner errors as Speight (1998), which arrive at conclusive and well-argued judgements in almost all cases. It might be conceded that other speakers would not necessarily endorse all these judgements, but, as Speight (personal communication) points out, he usually consults colleagues, and his judgements can usually be shown to be well in line with corpus evidence. A second objection is that lexico-grammatical fuzziness is not alone responsible for the difficulties that both native and non-native examiners have in detecting errors. On the contrary, the correct identification of errors stands or falls by the examiner’s linguistic competence, which, in any case, can only ever approximate full target-language competence. The smaller the target-language experience of the examiners, and the more restricted their views of its rules and regularities, the more likely they are to commit errors of judgement. Third, and most crucially, the rapid growth of monitor corpora is allowing analysts to state with ever-increasing confidence whether a pattern is common, marginal or non-existent at various points in time. It is therefore possible to invalidate the argument, touched upon in the introduction to Part I, that negative evidence of non-occurrence should lead us to refrain from acceptability judgements. While the case can still be made that today’s corpora are too small to investigate the behaviour of rare or specialized lexis, even now the kinds of phraseological and semantic clines Legenhausen sees as obstacles to error identification can be comprehensively described. For example, as little as ten years ago it would have been difficult to decide whether the verbs persuade or debate can be used with the pattern VP+NP+into+V-ing, and indeed, intuition might still lead us to reject this usage. However, corpus evidence shows that the pattern occurs with a large number of verbs, including persuade and debate, in cases

< previous page

page_249

next page >

< previous page

page_250

next page >

Page 250 where these are imbued with a particular semantic prosody (see Hunston and Francis 2000:102–107). All of this shows that the linguistic problems Legenhausen sees for error analysis are clearly overstated. As regards the present study, the academic corpus used (CAE) is large enough to determine with a high degree of certainty whether or not a particular usage is acceptable. The following sample text by a German translation scholar will serve to illustrate how corpus-based analysis can tease out the niceties of deviance from target-language norms: (3) COLLINS COBUILD: English Usage. London: HarperCollins Publishers 1992. 808 p. Dictionaries and in particular English dictionaries are appearing at a breathtaking pace. They offer an increasing variety of insights into the intricate patterns of the lexicon. Each new dictionary, rightly or wrongly, claims a new way new dictionaries advertised might induce users to pile these in front of looking at the lexicon. The of themselves so that they can have them when they are at a loss about a specific point highlighted in particular reference work. A critical assessment of any new venture in lexicography should therefore take into account and supply some guidance about what, at least in the opinion of the reviewer, desks…. might warrant allotting extra space to the book in question among the many others that already clutter one of several verbs that share significant aspects of meaning, various ways of The entry damage the most general verbs damage and harm the entry presents an ordered list of causing injury or harm. 12 words that express these different shades of meaning…. Unfortunately, only a few of the words, ie the out of 53 exemplified by sample sentences, and compares poorly with any good dictionary other entries dealing with groups of words between words and examples… This review article exhibits a well-organized macro-structure, thus lending evidence to its author’s extensive writing experience and strategic skill. More to the point, however, it also suggests that the author has ‘fossilized’ (Selinker 1972); that is, despite constant exposure to English academic writing, he has stopped noticing differences between his interlanguage system and target-language norms, thus making no effort to revise his writing in the direction of the latter. What is particularly intriguing about this text is the absence of straight-forward grammatical errors. Nevertheless there is a clear sense that it is inadequate on the collocational level, though as little as five years ago it

< previous page

page_250

next page >

< previous page

page_251

next page >

Page 251 would have been difficult to pinpoint the exact cause of the problem. Fortunately, the advent of large computerized corpora has remedied this situation. A few examples follow; these are also intended to illustrate the approach to error analysis taken in Section 2.3. One word combination that sounds distinctly odd in the above context is have them (i.e. dictionaries) at their fingertips . Corpus analysis reveals that there are two basic senses of the idiom to have s.th. at one’s fingertips . In its first sense, which has been recorded in all the major dictionaries, it refers to objects or abstract entities that are easy to reach, readily available or can be used at leisure. What the dictionary definitions do not capture, however, is the semantic prosody of the idiom, for what we have at our fingertips is an electronic device, or at least something that is electronically mediated: [V]iewers of a cable TV system will have four angles of a football match at their fingertips. All basic controls are at your fingertips for straightforward, no fuss operation. The wonders of modern technology at our fingertips! I store everything electronically… If someone phones to ask about a case I have everything at my fingertips. In its second sense, the idiom refers to a person’s grasp of abstract entities such as facts or stories: Alice, who has theory at her fingertips and turns to the tarot cards for truth [S]he had a fund of anecdotes at her fingertips For those who have little art history at their fingertips, there is of course the audioguide Clearly, the noun dictionary is a concrete noun and thus does not agree with the semantic prosody of this second, more metaphorical sense. An equally subtle collocational error has crept into the clause beginning with ‘the entry damage stands for’. The verb stand for codifies a relationship between subject and object where the subject is an alternative, usually symbolic way of representing the object, as the following concordance lines reveal: Ever after, in his symbolism, the western quarter, either America or the sunken continent of Atlantis, stands for the visionary ideal of perfect liberty, from which fallen man, in Europe and Asia, is cut off by the floods of moral fallacies, the ‘Atlantic deep.’ (CAE)

< previous page

page_251

next page >

< previous page

page_252

next page >

Page 252 and Dido, Queen of Carthage features the man who in many ways can stand for the ur-coloniser, Aeneas. Surrey the courtier stands for a vanishing chivalry (CAE) The McCulloch-Pitts brain is a network of dots and lines, each dot standing for a neuron and each line standing for a connection between neurons. (CAE) each ‘don’t care’ symbol may stand for a binary sequence of any length (CAE) These examples show that in authentic English the object is always singular, whereas the foreign-born author of the above sample text has used a plural object. More seriously, though, he has clearly misunderstood the semantic prosody of the verb. Other subtle errors include the misuse of following, which is normally used in a temporal sense, and the textually inadequate uses of colloquial get and luckily . In conclusion, it is worth reiterating that the analysis of interlanguage texts can now be undertaken with almost unerring scientific rigour. With the help of large computerized corpora analysts can pin down deviations from nativespeaker usage with great confidence. They can even capture the effects of what Hammerly has termed ‘intrusive interference’, i.e. the over- and under-representation of particular lexis and/or syntax in non-native text. Equally important, work on text assessment done within the framework of linguistic pragmatics has enabled interlanguage researchers to approach errors from both the syntactico-semantic and the textual-pragmatic perspectives. The only remaining problem concerns the evaluation of deviant features of learner language; due to human subjectivity, this problem will never be amenable to a fully satisfactory solution. 2.2 German writers’ performance in the field of discourse markers The preceding section has demonstrated that the manual analysis of interlanguage texts has much to tell us about the knowledge deficits of advanced non-native writers. Coupled with the consultation of large native-speaker corpora, it is particularly helpful in teasing out sources of error which even native speakers find difficult to pin down. What pen-and-paper analysis cannot bring to light, however, is the extent of over- and under-representation of target-language features in non-native text. For this purpose, we need to compare native and learner corpora in what is now commonly termed a ‘contrastive interlanguage analysis’ (Granger 1998a). There have so far been comparatively few studies in this area (see the introduction to this chapter), and only two that deal specifically with

< previous page

page_252

next page >

< previous page

page_253

next page >

Page 253 English-language academic texts by German authors: Lindner (1994) and Lorenz (1997). There is not much in Lindner’s (1994) comparison of learner with native English that was not known from previous collections of learner errors or teaching guides such as Swan (1984) or Speight’s regular column ‘Would you have marked it wrong?’ in Praxis des Neusprachlichen Unterrichts. Among other things, Lindner finds evidence of prepositional errors such as example for or typical for, an over-representation of such words as already, nevertheless or concerning, a general preference for Latinate over phrasal verbs and an under-representation of the passive progressive. He also dismisses some of the prevailing myths about German learner English, showing that learner sentences are neither too long nor too complex. But the greatest merit of this study lies in the empirical demonstration that unnaturalness may arise through the cumulative effect of various types of deviance. Lorenz’s (1997) study has a much narrower focus, looking as it does at differences in the use of adjectival intensification between native English writers and German writers of English. Its findings show a general over-use of intensifiers by German writers, although such overuse appears to decline with growing linguistic proficiency. The result is a ‘markedly non-native style, perceived as overly eager to impress’ (Lorenz 1998:59). Lorenz argues that it cannot be learners’ lack of conceptual synonyms that leads them to over-indulge in intensifier use; he surmises that they may simply feel a greater need for emphatic expression. There is also some evidence that German writers of English tend to make their sentences top-heavy by premodifying adjectives which in turn premodify subject nouns. This is in line with the violations of the ‘end-weight’ principle already discussed above. This section follows Lindner’s and Lorenz’s lead in presenting a corpus-based investigation into discourse marker use in the English of German authors. It describes the performance of advanced German-speaking second-language learners in the area of first-level and second-level discourse markers. The intention is to identify similarities and differences between native and non-native use of these markers with a view to building up a precise picture of learners’ difficulties. In a first step, a comparison will be made of marker frequency in native and non-native writing. The analysis is contrastive in nature, drawing on two purpose-built, sizeable corpora of academic writing by Germans and a comparable corpus based on CAE. In a second step, a classification will be attempted of typical errors made by non-native writers. One possible drawback of exclusive reliance on published data is that they may have been edited and/or proofread by native speakers before publication. To make up for the potential loss of validity arising from this and to avoid the narrow focus on learner English adopted by recent studies such as those assembled in Granger (1998a), two corpora were

< previous page

page_253

next page >

< previous page

page_254

next page >

Page 254 assembled, one comprising published professional papers, the other consisting of semi-professional student writing at university level. In the assembly of the first corpus particular attention was paid to the unadulterated nature of the non-native writing, easily noticeable from the presence of lexico-grammatical errors; the material making up this corpus was drawn from a variety of disciplines such as linguistics, philosophy and theology. The corpus of student writing comprises essays or term papers by German university-level students of English, who may be assumed to have a reasonable command of the language. Another theoretical limitation of this approach is the impossibility of controlling for students’ ability to write in their native language (Grabe and Kaplan 1996:197–198). However, it is reasonable to suppose that students who choose to study foreign languages are proficient language learners who usually display above-average writing abilities in their mother tongue (Wolff 1989). Tables 2.1 and 2.2 give an indication of the composition of the corpora, which together comprise around 490,000 words. They are thus larger than those used in Granger (1998a), but not significantly so. The conclusions based on frequency data should therefore be tested against more extensive corpora once these become available; they must, until then, be viewed with due caution.2 Table 2.1 Examples of texts: Corpus A: Student texts (64) Text no. Title 1 The creation of suspense and fear in Macbeth by William Shakespeare 2 W.B.Yeats’s two Byzantium poems 3 Social and socialist aspects in H.G.Wells’s The Time Machine 4 The end of the world in rock music 5 Innovative word formations found on the Internet Table 2.2 Examples of texts: Corpus B: Professional texts (19) Text Title no. 1 From modernism to post-modernism: (e)motion pictures in Proust, Eco, Barth and Pynchon 2 Teaching Romance linguistics with online French, Italian and Spanish corpora 3 The promotion of explicit and implicit learning strategies in English instruction: a necessary aim? 4 Binary and ternary deictic systems in speech and writing. Evidence from the use of demonstratives in Spanish 5 Intercultural communication in a virtual environment

< previous page

page_254

next page >

< previous page

page_255

next page >

Page 255 2.2.1 A comparison of discourse marker frequency and use in native and non-native writing In this section a comparison will be made of discourse marker frequency and use in native and non-native writing. I begin with the three types of functional category accorded detailed treatment in Part I, Chapter 4, including firstlevel discourse devices falling into these categories. I then proceed to a replication of Granger’s (1998b) investigation into the use by French learners of sentence fragments followed by a that -clause. The idea is to gauge the extent of similarity and difference between English texts by French vs. German learners and thereby to ascertain the proportion of non-native target-language behaviour attributable to a specific first-language background. A more speculative look at sentence adverbs and suggestors concludes the section. The core hypothesis proposed here is that non-native target-language behaviour is characterized by an over-use of high-frequency first-level discourse devices, and an under-use of SLDMs. Since the frequency counts in Part I have also yielded significant evidence on SLDM frequency in German text, a further hypothesis can be tested; this is that the frequency of literal equivalents of SLDMs in learners’ native languages may correlate with that of the corresponding target language item. 2.2.1.1 Exemplifiers As in Part I, Chapter 4, I shall start my investigation with the category of exemplifiers. Table 2.3 shows the use of first-level and second-level exemplifiers in native English texts and in texts by German writers of English. The results of the frequency count appear to bear out the core hypothesis proposed above. There are striking differences in exemplifier use between native and German writers of English. Most remarkably, the first-level markers for example/for instance occur with much higher frequency in professional non-native writing than they do in native writing. This appears to reflect a kind of simplification strategy on the part of non-native professional writers, who may not be aware of the extensive range of exemplifiers available in English. By contrast, for example/for instance were found to be slightly less frequent in the non-native student texts than they are in native writing. One possible explanation may be in terms of a lack of reader responsibility in student writing. As mentioned in Part I, Chapter 4, exemplification typically serves to ease the reader’s decoding task by illustrating a general principle, rule, state of things, etc. with a concrete fact or entity. Under-use of exemplification as a rhetorical strategy in student writing may therefore bespeak a general lack of concern for comprehensibility. Exemplificatory SLDMs are consistently rare across both non-native groups. This tendency is particularly marked for non-native professionals,

< previous page

page_255

next page >

< previous page

page_256

Page 256 Table 2.3 Exemplifiers in native and non-native writing Natiυe Non-natiυe professionals (163,661 words) First- for example/for 140 (i.e. around 855 per million) leυel instance (around markers577 per million) SLDMs (see Part I, 1x examples are, 4x as examples … Chapter 4 for show/illustrate, 3x as in… example, individual items 2x is/seems a good example, 1x and frequencies) examples include

< previous page

next page >

Non-natiυe language students (315,017 words) 130 (i.e. around 412 per million) 3x an (other) example is, 1x a good example of this is, 1x let us take an example, 1x provide an excellent example of, 1x to give a few examples, 2x examples include

page_256

next page >

< previous page

page_257

next page >

Page 257 who use even fewer exemplifiers than students. In addition, non-native writers’ awareness of collocational variability seems to be extremely limited, as all adjectival collocations with example are taken from the ‘quality’ segment of the noun’s collocational range (good, excellent) . These two types of under-use seem to be consistent with the over-use, noted above, of first-level markers in non-native professional writing, with the unspecific for example/for instance taking the place of more specific SLDMs. It might be expected that writers at an advanced stage of language learning, such as those whose texts are considered here, experience no difficulty in forming and using exemplifiers. The evidence, however, clearly suggests otherwise, underlining the need for reference works covering SLDMs (see Chapter 3). Table 2.4 shows some typical errors made by professionals and students. 2.2.1.2 Reformulators Not all the reformulators discussed in Part I, Chapter 4 will be considered here, since some are either too infrequent (e.g. υiz. ) or too difficult to handle statistically (e.g. SLDMs of the type also called, which, as seen in Part I, allow a bewildering array of variations). Again, the findings have to be viewed with some reservations and will have to be tested against larger non-native corpora. Only the highly common reformulators in other words, that is, i.e. and namely were tested for frequency (see Table 2.5). There are wide differences between native and non-native writing on the one hand, and between non-native professional and non-native student texts on the other. Most remarkably, the reformulators under discussion are substantially over-represented in the texts by non-native professionals. The extent of this over-representation varies from around 80 per cent in the case of that is to as much as 300 per cent in the case of i.e. The numerical evidence thus seems so overwhelming that one would expect to obtain similar results with larger corpora. In the light of this, it is all the more surprising that the student texts exhibit a countervailing tendency towards under-representation of the markers in question. However, this is much less marked than the opposite tendency for professionals, and there is one exception: the reformulator namely appears to be over-used by students and professionals alike. It is no light task to explain such differences. Transfer from L1 to L2 may well play a role in the consistent over-use of namely and that is in English prose by Germans, since German nämlich and das heiβt/d.h. occur with greater frequency than their English equivalents. This hypothesis was borne out by a trawl through PCAE and PCAG, with the German reformulators being three to four times more frequent than their literal English equivalents (see Table 2.6). As for the over-representation of the other items (in other words, i.e.) in non-native professional discourse, one explanation may lie in the

< previous page

page_257

next page >

< previous page

page_258

next page >

Page 258 Table 2.4 Errors in non-native use of exemplifiers Error *another good example for a diatopically differentiated standard language is German *An example therefor [sic!] is… (?) like in the following example

Comment wrong use of preposition traceable to German Beispiel für traceable to German dafür contamination of the written register by a variant peculiar to conversational style Indeed, invention is often considered to be the only effective way to confusion of such is the case with and for reach [?, achieve] a comprehensive description of English. *Such is, example (may be traceable to French sentence for example, the concept [?, rationale] behind one of the most beginnings of the type tel est+noun phrase, thorough studies of the Italian verbal system. since the author is a Romance linguist) *which shall be used as an example interference from German das hier als Beispiel dienen soll *a deterring example collocational error (literal translation of German abschreckendes Beispiel [=cautionary example] )

< previous page

page_258

next page >

< previous page

page_259

next page >

Page 259 Table 2.5 Reformulator frequency in native and non-native academic English ( [extrapolated] occurrences per million words [actual occurrences in parentheses] ) Reformulator Natiυe Non-natiυe professionals (163,661 words)Non-natiυe language students (315,017 words) (PCAE) in other 46.8 85 (14) 25 (8) words that is 78.0 134 (22) 38 (12) i.e. (ie) 125.3 373 (61) 108 (34) namely 32.2 141 (23) 53 (17)

< previous page

page_259

next page >

< previous page

page_260

next page >

Page 260 Table 2.6 Reformulator frequency in native English and native German academic writing (occurrences per million words) Reformulator PCAE Reformulator PCAG that is 78.0das heißt 314.7 namely 32.2nämlich (reformulator) 87.3 language-bound nature of thought and formulation processes in L2. It seems plausible that most non-native professionals, although very advanced learners by most standards, continue to base their writing around a number of lexical and rhetorical ‘teddy bears’ (Hasselgren 1994) manifesting themselves as preferred (i.e. overused) lexical choices and rhetorical strategies. There is a strong case for believing that such fixed points are remnants of misinformed instruction and/or teaching materials relying on tightly circumscribed sets of one-for-one correspondences between languages (Siepmann 2003b). By contrast, L1 writers use a broad repertoire of rhetorical strategies, and these rhetorical choices in turn determine the use of a wider range of lexis. The implications for teaching seem clear. Rather than relying on tightly circumscribed lists of one-word markers based on source-language lists and passed on from one generation of language teachers to the next, it is necessary to provide writers with a greater variety of functional vocabulary. To turn now to errors, there are too few in the corpora for systematic statements to be made, but some of them appear to lend support to the hypotheses propounded above. The following sentence clearly illustrates the L2 writer’s lack of sophistication in the use of reformulators: (?)That is why Koch and Oesterreicher call it a Varietätenkette, that is a variety chain Although the all-purpose reformulator that is is not unacceptable here, it may contribute to an overall impression of foreignness. A writer in full possession of present-day English would probably have used the more specialized reformulators or or literally, whose primary function is to introduce a translation (see Part I, Chapter 4), and would have dispensed with the indefinite article in front of variety chain . The next example shows that the over-representation of that is in the non-native professional texts may also be attributable to an unacceptable widening of its function: (?)Dixon and Fraser (1986) agree with the notion firmly related to language status, that is, the children should feel free to use their home language in the classroom and the English language should be presented as an additional language, not a replacement.

< previous page

page_260

next page >

< previous page

page_261

next page >

Page 261 Here the writer intended the clause introduced by that is to make explicit the meaning of the noun notion in the previous discourse. While this particular type of back-reference is admissible in German, it seems impossible in English. The sentence under discussion would have to be considerably recast to make its meaning entirely clear. As regards the under-use of in other words, that is and i.e. in the students’ texts, this may stem from the lesser degree of rhetorical complexity generally found in student writing. Let us now take a look at another set of reformulators (see Table 2.7). As with the previous set, we find substantial over-representation of reformulators in the texts by non-native professionals, and varying degrees of under-representation in the student texts. There is also further evidence of non-native partiality for a number of lexical ‘teddy bears’ probably based on (or learned as) one-to-one equivalences. Thus, or rather, which translates into German as besser gesagt, appears in many basic vocabulary books aimed at German learners of English. Not so with or/and indeed, which, although notably common in native written English, is absent from many large desk dictionaries and equally from the writing of most German writers of English. The only instance of this marker in the non-native corpora is embedded in a defective environment, highlighting the difficulty of using it correctly: *Finding skilled work was as difficult for the coloured immigrants, mostly from the Caribbean and India or Pakistan, as was finding decent housing, or indeed, housing at all. Here the fixed phrase at all has to be replaced by prenominal any kind of . Given the limited size of the corpus, as well as the only moderate frequency of the markers under discussion, it is impossible to identify error causes systematically. Some may be due to mother tongue interference: *Thus we most times, if not at all, do not write or spell how we speak. *It is a competition in which they call each other names and even more. Others are somewhat harder to account for. In the following case, the student writer who made the error was probably unaware of the syntactic constraints on such markers as or better, which links phrases rather than clauses: *Another problem is the correct orthographic form, or better do we write Internet (and other words too) with a capital letter or not? Let us now consider a third type of reformulator (see Table 2.8).

< previous page

page_261

next page >

< previous page

page_262

next page >

Page 262 Table 2.7 Reformulator frequency in native English and native German academic English ( [extrapolated] per million words) Reformulator Natiυe Non-natiυe professionals (163,661 words) not to say/if not/or should I/ (and/or) even/nay or rather/or better (still) / (or/and) indeed/ (to put it/or) more correctly/ more accurately/more properly/more precisely/ to put it another (and better) way/if you like/ if you will/to be (more) precise (exact) /if you prefer better (best) described as/known as//more properly named

< previous page

occurrences

Non-natiυe language students (315,017 words) 150.5 (not to say 5.4; or/and even 195 (32 [28x 101 (32 109.8; 35.1x if not; 0.2x nay) and/or even, [30x or 33.8 (10.9x or rather/or better; 17.5x or 4x if not]) even, 2x if indeed; 2x (to put it/or) more not] ) correctly/more accurately/ more 49 (8 [5x or 29 (9 [5x properly/more precisely, 2x if you will/if rather, 2x or rather, you like; 1.4x to be (more) precise) more 3x or precisely, 1x better, 1x to be more or/and precise] ) indeed]) 0.5 0 0

page_262

next page >

< previous page

page_263

next page >

Page 263 Table 2.8 Reformulator frequency in native English and native German academic English (occurrences per million words) NativeNon-native professionals (163,661 Non-native language students (315,017 words) words) as already mentioned 34.5 24.4 (4) 37.4 (10) (etc.) Here it is the student texts which appear to resemble native writing more closely, whilst the professional texts exhibit a considerable degree of under-representation. Since the markers in question are pivotal in signalling textual macrostructure, their under-use may well contribute to a lack of coherence, a feature of German writing noted in such studies as Clyne (1987). A number of errors are in evidence; in the professional texts, we find the following infelicity: *These structured messages were considerably longer as pointed out above (285 words in comparison to the average of 210), and they triggered interesting comparisons As noted in Part I, Chapter 4, reformulators rarely occupy final position; when they do, they are separated from the rest of the sentence by a comma. The lack of punctuation in the above sentence thus produces an infelicitous visual and rhythmic effect. Wrong verb choices appear to be a common type of error. Thus, in the following example, the verb quote, which does not normally occur in reformulators of this type, takes the place of the more common note or mention; as a consequence, as quoted may well be interpreted as referring to the subject noun Kath rather than the entire clause. *As quoted, Kath finds herself in a double-bind While the above error is taken from the text of an experienced German academic, the following is a typical example of a student’s error: *As I mentioned in my very first words the research on language acquisition has been in the linguists’ interest for many years The student appears to be unaware of academic conventions; in native academic style the sentence would probably have read as follows: As noted in the introduction/as noted at the outset, research on language acquisition has attracted the attention of linguists for many years.

< previous page

page_263

next page >

< previous page

page_264

next page >

Page 264 Table 2.9 Lexicalized reformulators in native and non-native academic English (occurrences per million words) NatiυeNon-natiυe professionals Non-natiυe language students (163,661 words) (315,017 words) in a word/by and large/ on the whole/in short/in 44.3 36.6 [6 (5x on the whole, 44.4 [14 (11x in short, 2x on the brief/to be brief/in a nutshell 1x by and large)] whole, 1x in brief)] Finally, a look at a number of firmly lexicalized reformulators (see Table 2.9). The reformulators in this set are somewhat exceptional in being recorded in a large number of dictionaries and vocabulary books. There is remarkable complementarity between native and non-native writing, suggesting that the availability of prefabricated language in dictionaries and other reference books leads to more adequate use by non-native writers. Again the difference between non-native professionals and natives is wider than that between natives and non-native students. Further research on larger corpora will be needed to determine whether individual items such as in short are over-used in non-native writing. But even where items are lexicalized, so that their meaning and use can in theory be checked with the help of a dictionary, the performance of non-native writers is error-prone, as the following examples demonstrate: (?)On the whole, the outcome of Table 12 shows quite clearly, that most of the categories where Creole was rated higher than Standard were ‘private’ or ‘informal situations where intimate persons were involved *What is a soap?—Different definitions in short. In the first example the writer would have been better advised to recast his sentence entirely. He is trying to describe the overall picture emerging from the table, and this is one of the wordings he could have used. The second example illustrates a clear misuse of the reformulator in short; it is equated with in brief, although even the latter could not be used in this context. 2.2.1.3 Inferrers This brings us to a comparison of the use of inferrers in native and non-native writing (see Table 2.10). From what little data is available it seems that some common multi-word inferrers are heavily over-represented in the writing of non-natives.

< previous page

page_264

next page >

< previous page

page_265

next page >

Page 265 Table 2.10 Inferrer use in native and non-native writing (occurrences per million words) Natiυe Non-natiυe professional (163,661 Non-natiυe language students (315,017 words) words) this/which argues/entails/ 85.5 (14 occurrences [12x this 69.8 (22 occurrences [15x this means, 1x implies/indicates/means/ means, 1x this implies, 1x this this indicates, 2x this proves, 5x this proves/shows/suggests that (29.6) suggests]) shows] ) the consequence/upshot/ result is that 6.1 (1x the result is that) 0 the conclusion is that the corollary is that the implication is that (6.7) it turns out that (2.1) 0 0 it therefore comes as no surprise that 6.1 (1x not surprisingly) 12.7 (4 occurrences [3x it is not it is no surprise, then, that surprising that, 1x not surprisingly] ) it is not surprising, then, that (5.3) not surprisingly, then, not unnaturally unsurprisingly obviously, then, 0 0 clearly, therefore, plainly, then, manifestly, therefore, (0.9)

< previous page

page_265

next page >

< previous page

page_266

next page >

Page 266 Such is the case with inferrers of the type this means in professional as well as student writing, and with it is not surprising that in student writing. By contrast, it appears as if inferrers of the type noun phrase+ be+that are rare in student writing, though the number of occurrences is not sufficient to warrant speaking of under-use. It also looks as if such inferrers as it turns out that or obviously, then occur with comparative rarity in non-native speaker writing. The performance of non-native professionals shows a number of deviations from native-speaker usage. The author of the following excerpt, for example, has shorn the inferrer it is not surprising that of the introductory it and the verb. This may be due to confusion with (it is) no/small wonder that, where such ellipsis is available: *…discuss themes within the norms for ‘Ausländerliteratur’ tend to be published, which in turn silences differences and severely limits the writers’ personal development. Not surprising that the title of Engin’s third publication, ‘Nur der Hauch vom Paradies,’ is also the same as Tekinay’s novel. The following deviation also concerns an inferrer based on the notion of ‘lack of surprise’. The author has erroneously used so as a pro-form for the entire preceding clause. The reason why this use sounds odd is not immediately obvious. A corpus search reveals that this use of the pro-form, in which it follows the function word not, is commonly preceded by the adverb of manner necessarily or such adverbs of extent as significantly, infinitely or supremely . It does not, however, occur with sentence adverbs like surprisingly . *…is suggested by a recent article (Shields-Brodber 1997) on the Jamaican language situation. Not surprisingly so: as Edwards (1982:26) notes, the social context in which speech evaluations (or rather speaker evaluations) occur is not a static entity. To conclude this section, let us consider an excerpt from a student text. It illustrates an infelicitous use of the inferrer this means, which has no clear reference point in the preceding discourse: *A human being is a collection of negative attributes. The human veins are dirty, so he calls them mire. But we have to remember one thing: humans have not only created this building but the whole city of Byzantium. So Yeats questions the human existence and the great Art. This means that when life comes to an end everything is questionable. And this is the topic of the first stanza: death.

< previous page

page_266

next page >

< previous page

page_267

next page >

Page 267 2.2.1.4 Sentence fragments followed by a that-clause Granger (1998b) was the first to conduct an investigation into non-native use of multi-word markers (‘sentence builders’ in her terminology). Her investigation is similar to mine in comparing a corpus of native English writing and a corpus of English writing produced by native speakers of French; the latter is a sub-section of the International Corpus of Learner English (ICLE) database (Granger 1993). Granger compares two of the most common syntactic frames in which SLDMs occur; these were described in greater detail in Part I, Chapter 2: Passive Frame it+(modal)+passive verb (of saying/thinking)+that -clause Examples: it is said/thought that…; it can be claimed/assumed that Active Frame I or we/one/you (generalized pronoun)+(modal)+active verb (of saying/thinking)+that -clause Examples: I maintain/claim that…; we can see/one could say that… (Granger 1998b:154) Granger found similar frequencies of the passive structure in native and non-native writing, but an appreciable overrepresentation of the active structure in non-native writing. Most heavily overworked in the learner corpus were active frames based around the verbs say and think . Granger concludes that the unnaturalness of much learner writing can only be partly explained by a lack of prefabs; another reason may be the excessive use of particular types of SLDM, a feature of learner language that may result in wordy and thus unnatural prose. Granger confines her attention to questions of over- and under-representation, omitting to raise the equally important issue of misuse. It is interesting to replicate and extend Granger’s investigation using the corpora built for the present study. One finds that German students are much less inclined to overuse the active frame than their French counterparts; there are around 120 instances in 200,000 words, as against 400 in Granger’s data and 100 in native-speaker writing. It thus seems reasonable to assume that, in the present case, target-language behaviour is strongly influenced by firstlanguage background. It is also evident that Granger’s purely number-crunching approach fails to do justice to the complexities surrounding the non-native use of these markers. In my corpora there are various types of errors in evidence which strongly suggest that the most serious problem for German writers of English is neither under-use nor over-use, but rather misuse of the structures in question. These errors can be classified under two broad headings—namely, context-independent and context-dependent errors. Table 2.11 shows a number of typical context-independent errors.

< previous page

page_267

next page >

< previous page

page_268

Page 268 Table 2.11 Examples of context-independent errors Error O’Neill himself refers in his published letter to Christianity as ‘once heroic in martyrs for its intense faith, now pleading weakly for intense belief in anything, even Godhead itself.’ One can follow from this that O’Neill was more concerned with the question of the essence of life than with the search for a god according to Christianity. Experience is ‘Not worth the price’ he said. ‘That’s the trouble of all single minded activity; it costs you your liberty. You find yourself driven into a corner. You’re a prisoner.’ To sum it up one can say that experience because it is always limited or less flexible counts for Anthony as single-minded activity which makes you a prisoner. Thinking about early childhood education, we can remark that the debate over one system or two is related to the notion of capability of bilingual children.

next page > Comment This error may have been caused by confusion between the inferrers it follows from this that and one may conclude from this that.

Wrong extension of the summarizer to sum up by insertion of anaphoric it; this kind of error reveals the difficulty non-native writers may have in viewing scope as one of the central features of a discourse marker. Archaism; in modern English remark is no longer synonymous with notice or note, so that we can remark that should be replaced with we note/notice/find that As well, Wells alludes to the situation of London East-End workers, unidiomatic concatenation of two markers; who built the London underground railway. To put it briefly, one can when we prune one can say that, we have a say that Wells’ novel has not only some socialist aspects, in which much crisper and equally acceptable sentence Wells shows his political attitude and his ideas for the future, but also (disregarding for the moment other errors). a great share of social criticism.

< previous page

page_268

next page >

< previous page

page_269

next page >

Page 269 As for context-dependent errors, these may frequently be traced back to the writer’s lack of register awareness. There are a large number of phrases in non-native writing that may be regarded as remnants of an oral register; examples are I would say that, I think that and I am deeply convinced that . It must be remembered, of course, that such phrases may occasionally occur in native writing, but not usually with the same frequency or in the same kind of context. To illustrate, the author of the following extract appears to employ the oral marker I would say that to introduce a hypothesis about a play (this is not entirely clear due to inconsistencies in the use of verb forms): Blanche DuBois’ fall and decline hadn’t necessarily gone so far. Somebody, Stella for example had had to realize earlier that something went wrong with her sister. I would say that a psychological therapy in the middle of the play had rescued Blanche from her final disaster. In this kind of context, a native writer would have used a hypothesis marker such as my contention is that or it is fair to assume that . Although it is probably impossible to formulate hard-and-fast rules on the use of I think and I would say that in native writing, a few tendencies are apparent from corpora of native language use: • I think that and I would say that occur with relative frequency in reviews, where a personal style is sometimes favoured; • I think that and I would say that are moderately common in passages characterized by a didactic intent and couched in an informal style; • I think that and I would say that are more common in the texts of linguists, educationalists and sociologists than they are in hard science texts. None of these features would seem to apply to the above text, and this is probably why the use of I would say that has an awkward ring to it. That said, it is worth bearing in mind that modern academic English is generally more tolerant of the easy familiarity of a speech-like style than is either French or German scholarly prose, where such colloquial markers as je pense que or ich denke, dass would be wholly inappropriate. With regard to the frequency of the sentence fragments under discussion, the academic prose of German professional writers was found to resemble even more closely that of natives than student writing. This appears to confirm the above assumption that the frames in question are subject to misuse rather than over-use. In fact, the texts by German professionals exhibited a slight under-representation of the active frames and a native-like frequency of passive frames. This does not mean, however, that German professionals are not prone to error. On the contrary, there were a number of interesting mistakes in evidence which offer important

< previous page

page_269

next page >

< previous page

page_270

next page >

Page 270 insights into the learning needs of very advanced second-language writers. The following example comes from the pen of a German language teaching specialist: As a final statement we may notice that the applications of construc tivism are widely ranged concerning both learners without special needs, learners at-risk to fail and even very gifted learners which are promoted by the opportunities to create their own ways of learning and to pace the development of knowledge. While the writer has correctly memorized the English SLDM we may notice that, he wrongly specifies it by a prepositional phrase introduced by as. In idiomatic English this prepositional phrase would have to be replaced by an adverbial such as finally or by a sentence fragment such as a final point to be noted is that… Underlying this error may be the erroneous assumption that English SLDMs can enter the same type of syntactic environment as German SLDMs. The following error, already cited in the section on inferrers, may stem from a similar misconception: animate objects are usually in the postposition-NP which similarly excludes the possibility of it being understood as an AAP of time. From this, we can recognize that examples (16) to (18) are merely a case of offering illustrative examples. In German such SLDMs as daran lässt sich erkennen, dass or daraus lässt sich schlieβen, dass are notably common. Probable reasons for the writer’s error, then, are first confusion between the two most common dictionary equivalents of erkennen ( realize and recognize) and second the erroneous assumption that SLDMs can be translated on the basis of their verbal heads. However, recognize only takes a that -clause complement when it means ‘be ready to admit’, and realize is only used to form SLDMs of the suggestor type (it is fairly generally realized that…) . In the present case the writer should have used an inferrer centred around the verb follow: from here/from this it follows that… 2.2.1.5 Conclusion The major conclusion which this section allows is that, in both quantitative and qualitative terms, SLDM use by advanced German writers of English compares unfavourably with that of natives. The findings seem to give further weight to the thesis that unnaturalness is the result of overt errors on the one hand, and of the unusual frequency of occurrence of some items on the other. Quantitatively speaking, there emerges a fairly consistent pattern of over- and under-use in the texts by German natives. Frequency counts

< previous page

page_270

next page >

< previous page

page_271

next page >

Page 271 indicate that their writing is heavily skewed in favour of lexicalized first-level markers. In particular, it appears that the wide variety of syntactically integrated markers in native academic prose (e.g. an example is provided by) is replaced by a limited number of short, non-integrated devices (e.g. for example ) in non-native writing. Where German writers of English do resort to SLDMs they tend to use the commonest of these with much greater frequency than natives and to fight shy of structures which lack a ‘direct’ equivalent in their mother tongue. Yet it may be observed that they are much less inclined to over-use sentence fragments followed by a that -clause than their French counterparts, and that there seems to be a correlation between the adequate use of SLDMs by non-natives and their coverage in dictionaries or textbooks. Qualitatively speaking, the analysis has revealed a number of recurrent error types across different categories of SLDMs. The next section attempts a classification of these error types. The reasons for such errors are not yet totally clear. It may be surmised that most non-native professionals, although very advanced learners by most standards, continue to base their writing around a number of lexical and rhetorical ‘teddy bears’ (Hasselgren 1994) manifesting themselves as preferred (i.e. overused) lexical choices and rhetorical strategies. There is a strong case for believing that such fixed points are remnants of misinformed instruction and/or teaching materials relying on tightly circumscribed sets of one-for-one correspondences between languages (Siepmann 2003b). By contrast, L1 writers use a broad repertoire of rhetorical strategies, and these rhetorical choices in turn determine the use of a wider range of lexis. The implications for teaching seem clear. Rather than relying on tightly circumscribed lists of one-word markers based on source-language lists and passed on from one generation of language teachers to the next it is necessary to provide writers with a greater variety of functional vocabulary. 2.2.2 A classification of error types Whereas the previous section has compared the frequencies of particular types of marker in L1 and L2 writing, as well as characteristic errors associated with their use in L2 writing, this section attempts a classification of error types. The exemplificatory material has been culled not just from the corpora described in the previous section but also from other non-native writings. Two main error types may be distinguished: lexico-grammatical and semantic-functional errors. The former group can be further subdivided into valency and other lexico-grammatical errors. Let us look at these groups one by one.

< previous page

page_271

next page >

< previous page

page_272

next page >

Page 272 2.2.2.1 Valency errors Valency theory, pioneered by Tesnière (1959), has been briefly mentioned in Part I, Chapter 4. It describes the number and type of syntactic connections that a linguistic unit, especially a verb, may make with other units. As Quirk et al . (1985) point out, the French term ‘valency’ differs from the preferred English term ‘complementation’ in that it includes the subject of the clause. With the rise of computer corpus linguistics, the notion of valency has reemerged into prominence. Let us now look at a few typical valency errors involving SLDMs. The first example, from a French-language journal article, comes from the pen of a German language teaching specialist: La faute de langue fit son entrée dans l’horizon des êtres humains dès qu’ils commencèrent à développer quelque chose qui ressemblât à une norme de langue. C’est alors que naquit l’art du bene dicendi. Et il ne surprendra guère que des témoignages abondent au fur et à mesure que les hommes se mettent à écrire. This error is probably due to a word-for-word translation of the German suggestor es überrascht nicht, dass into French. The problem is that extraposition with impersonal it is not available with the French verb surprendre . French has a whole range of such suggestors at its disposal, but they are all based on adjectives: il n’y a rien d’étonnant à ce que, il n’est pas surprenant que, etc. The second example is from a study of translation by two German linguists: But even with the sense of permission, there are three times as many instances of MAY as of CAN. This might suggest taking with a grain of salt the claim quoted previously that… Here, the authors’ use of the inferrer this suggests is contextually adequate, but the grammatical complementation is unacceptable. While hedging by means of might is sometimes applied to the inferrer, it cannot be followed by a gerund. One reason may be that suggest tends to take a gerund mainly when it means ‘propose’. The error might therefore be due to the emphasis given to suggest+gerund in pattern-drill completion exercises where students have to choose between the gerund and the infinitive. The following excerpt, already cited in Section 2.2.1.4, contains another typical valency error: animate objects are usually in the postposition-NP which similarly excludes the possibility of it being understood as an AAP of time. From this, we can recognize that examples (16) to (18) are merely a case of offering illustrative examples.

< previous page

page_272

next page >

< previous page

page_273

next page >

Page 273 The verb recognize only takes a that -clause complement when it means ‘be ready to admit’. In the present case the writer should have used an inferrer centred around the verb follow: from here/from this it follows that… The next example illustrates a similar error: O’Neill himself refers in his published letter to Christianity as ‘once heroic in martyrs for its intense faith, now pleading weakly for intense belief in anything, even Godhead itself.’ One can follow from this that O’Neill was more concerned with the question of the essence of life than with the search for a god according to Christianity. The author wrongly uses follow with a human agent in subject position. This error may have been caused by confusion between the inferrers it follows from this that and one may conclude from this that . The writer of the following piece of text wrongly extends the summarizer to sum up, we/one can say that by insertion of anaphoric it, probably in an attempt to limit back reference to the previous sentence only: Experience is ‘Not worth the price’, he said. ‘That’s the trouble of all single minded activity; it costs you your liberty. You find yourself driven into a corner. You’re a prisoner.’ To sum it up one can say that experience because it is always limited or less flexible counts for Anthony as single-minded activity which makes you a prisoner. From verb valency let us now turn to adjective and noun valency. The following errors have been taken from the study of translation already referred to above; in the passage in question the authors are discussing the factors influencing the choice of German translation equivalents for the English auxiliary verb can: *Now it is imaginable that there is one more factor, (g), which is the permissibility in terms of the building bylaws… The authors have wrongly extrapolated what is a fairly productive pattern in English: it+be+adj+that . Unfortunately, the adjective imaginable is hardly ever used in this way, and when it is, the subsequent context usually describes a situation that it is difficult to form a mental picture of, as in the following example: with Arsenal one up, Hartson shot brilliantly, and almost scored, with a half-volley from 30 yards. One might have thought the Auxerre supporters were already in agony, but instead they stood and applauded Hartson’s effort. If the roles had been reversed, it is hardly imaginable that an English crowd would have done likewise.

< previous page

page_273

next page >

< previous page

page_274

next page >

Page 274 This interpretation is borne out by a look at the other linguistic environments in which imaginable commonly occurs; these normally contain superlatives (the most hideous crimes imaginable), adverbs of degree (barely, scarcely) or the pronoun every (in every imaginable way). The following example illustrates a misguided choice of collocation: *It seems, however, that Palmer’s (1979a:39) categorical statement that ‘with deontic modality the speaker performatively creates the possibility or necessity for the coming into reality of the conceptual state of affairs’ needs some relativization. Apart from its being top-heavy, this sentence contains an error in the use of the noun relativization, a noun whose German equivalent Relatiυierung is much more common. Interestingly, though, even in German the collocation Relatiυierung+brauchen is impossible, so that the error cannot really be the result of interference. A verbal reformulation is possible both in English and in German, along the lines of, respectively, need+to be qualified (somewhat) or müssen+relatiυiert werden . Another English variant can be based around the noun qualification, which unlike relativization, does enter into collocation with need . All these examples, which could easily be multiplied, suggest that even very advanced learners are prone to overgeneralization and commutability errors. They lack awareness of selection restrictions, thinking that multi-word discourse markers can be modified at will or literally translated into English. This contradicts Howarth’s (1996) finding that relatively stable ‘idioms’ result in fewer errors and underscores the need for dictionaries to provide more detailed information on the interplay between valency and linguistic environment. My guess is that very advanced learners continue to misuse SLDMs because of their comparative rarity in text, which means less exposure and less chance for correct memorization. 2.2.2.2 Other lexico-grammatical errors There is a wide variety of other lexico-grammatical errors in evidence. Most of the following samples have been provided by the aforementioned study of translation: *Comparing this rendition with all the others listed previously as equivalents of German compounds starting with a finite form of a modal, we come to find that this is the first case of an English modal being part of a rendition. There is nothing wrong here with the phrase we come to find as such. The problem is that it has been inserted into an unnatural context.

< previous page

page_274

next page >

< previous page

page_275

next page >

Page 275 Come+to+infinitive describes the result of a long process which is not normally expressed by means of a participial clause. Another example: *What this means in practice will be discussed and illustrated in later chapters. Before doing so, however, we should have a look at the linguistic area that will supply our examples. While the set phrase before doing so has been memorized correctly, its use is grammatically inadequate because the present participle doing can only refer back to an active verb in the preceding context (e.g. We will discuss … Before doing so, however, we should clarify some terms.). This problem could be solved by resorting to the SLDM before proceeding, which does not establish anaphoric reference. Now for a final example: *As with ability. so with willing(ness), there arises the question of whether it is to be considered a modal at all. Although the authors have correctly picked up the equative SLDM as with … so with, they have failed to register its usual linguistic environment. As with… so with is a complete-sentence SLDM, which never occurs as part of a complex sentence, as the following examples illustrate: As with early Greece, so with early Rome; her social and economic history is shrouded from our penetration in the thick haze of myths, poetry, and tradition. As with violence, so with sex: it’s one of every parent’s biggest concerns, and one of the most talked about. 2.2.2.3 Semantic-functional errors Somewhat ironically, the first error to be considered here comes from an article on learner corpora by a German language teaching specialist. Here a well-formed SLDM is used in an inappropriate semantic environment: The learners not only use more intensification, they also use it in places where it is semantically incompatible, communicatively unnecessary or syntactically undesirable. *It transpires that the impression of overstatement is not automatically generated by the numerical excess, but by genuine misapplication. The semantic prosody of the SLDM in question demands that the content of the that -clause it introduces be of the order of a secret, or something not well known at the moment of writing. In this context native writers would probably have preferred it turns out that .

< previous page

page_275

next page >

< previous page

page_276

next page >

Page 276 The next excerpt shows how non-native writers may indulge in unnecessary verbosity where a native English writer would simply have used a stock phrase: *Equipped with this background knowledge, let us now test the expression can see in (624). The phrase equipped with this background knowledge is doubly infelicitous. First, background knowledge would not normally be employed with reference to the preceding discourse in an academic text; second, the intended meaning can be expressed much more succinctly by the SLDM with this in mind . The following error, from the same book, may stem from an incorrect blending of two fixed expressions: *Several caveats are in place, though. As discussed in Siefmann (2001a), restrictors based around the noun caveat are used in a number of relatively fixed expressions, among which we find several caveats are in order. In this case, then, there is plainly confusion of in place, which means ‘in suitable surroundings’ or ‘firmly established’ with in order, which means ‘required’. Equative devices are often misused. In the following excerpt the author has confused this is so with and one example/possible rendition is: *There are different renditions for core and periphery . This is so with Coates’s gradients of restriction for CAN and MAY. Let us now look at a slightly longer passage: But does this mean that CAN and MAY are interchangeable here? As regards the noninterrogative counterpart of (203), that is, (187) Cader Idris, however, may be climbed from other points on this tour. which is contained in a written corpus, Palmer (1979a:157 f.) observes that ‘it is possible to substitute CAN… with very little change of meaning, if any’ and adds that ‘it would… be much more normal, especially in colloquial English, to use CAN.’ *This said, the use of CAN in (181) This game can be played by young children. could also be regarded as ‘more normal’ than the use of MAY.

< previous page

page_276

next page >

< previous page

page_277

next page >

Page 277 In the present case, the authors have correctly remembered the comparatively rare English marker this said, but use it in a contextually inadequate way. A marker such as similarly would have been a better choice. The following sentence from a student dissertation is intended to help the reader interpret a diagram correctly: *Please be conscious of the fact that spoken discourses are not always oral. It presents two interesting inadequacies. One is the use of the interjection please; the student writer had probably been told to put politeness at a premium in English, but was not aware that please is not used in modern academic prose. The second error concerns the nature of the phrase be conscious itself. The natural device to use here is an attention-getter such as note or remember, with the optional addition of an -ing-clause such as in interpreting the following table . The non-native professional who committed the following error was similarly unconscious of stylistic constraints: *My approach to Orientalism is from the point of view of women travelers. *It is amazing to find out that hardly any women exist in French literary history related to the Oriental canon, but this is no way an isolated phenomenon, as one might suppose. The writer may have been aware that English displays a tendency to insert an interpretative verb between the adjective and the matrix clause in such SLDMs as the above (see Rohdenburg 1998). Unfortunately, with the adjective amazing this tendency is as weak in English as it is in German. Also, the choice of interpretative verb is not open in such cases; find out is not a natural choice, whereas find is. Hence a natural English sentence would have started with it is amazing that or, less likely, it is amazing to find that . 2.2.2.4 Conclusion Most of the errors discussed in the previous two sections are interlanguage items that have no basis whatsoever in German. Rather, they appear to be evidence of the overgeneralization of rules falling within the scope of the ‘openchoice’ principle (Sinclair 1991) to an area where the ‘idiom principle’ holds sway. They also point to the difficulty of correctly memorizing the huge mass of collocational and colligational patterns needed to attain native-like mastery of a language or, more modestly, a sub-variety thereof. It is difficult to obtain exact figures on the frequency of errors in SLDM usage, but it is possible to make a reasonably accurate estimate from the available data: in the book on translation studies which provided a major

< previous page

page_277

next page >

< previous page

page_278

next page >

Page 278 source of errors in SLDM usage, for example, these make up around 10 per cent of all errors. This figure is even higher if we include mistakes in the formation of noun patterns such as the use of the preposition for with example . It is clear, then, that SLDM usage is by no means marginal to full linguistic competence and should receive more detailed treatment in advanced L2 classes as well as in dictionaries and writing textbooks. Further confirmation of the problems posed by SLDMs comes from translation. This is the subject of the next section. 2.3 Translations under the spotlight Given its high degree of difficulty, translation is often considered the most prestigious discipline of the language sciences. It would be reasonable to assume, therefore, that translators must be particularly adept at rendering such standard features of language as SLDMs. This assumption, however, is flatly belied by the evidence: even professional translators commit the occasional error or infelicity in SLDM usage. Since these are impossible to locate by computer, only a few odd examples will be given in what follows; one of these has already been discussed for different reasons in Part I. The first example comes from a book designed to help French scientists produce journal articles in English; it is intended to illustrate the translation of the English restrictor another troublesome point is that… (see Table 2.12). Paquette and Roehner (1991) have given a close translation which carries over from the English SLDM certain features that are not generally accepted in modern French usage. Admittedly, under the influence of English such constructions as un autre point est que may occasionally be spotted, but they continue to occur with very low frequency; experienced writers eschew them altogether. To bring the translation into accord with ordinary French usage it is necessary to separate the restrictor from the rest of the sentence by a colon or to recast it entirely using a different restrictor: Autre point préoccupant: Nos critères d’identification… Autre problème: Nos critères d’identification… Table 2.12 The translation of an SLDM in Paquette and Roehner (1991:50) English original French translation Another troublesome point is that our rules for (?)Un autre point préoccupant est que nos critères d’identification identifying specific cycles sometimes fail to yield de certains cycles ne permettent pas toujours de tirer des clear-cut results. conclusions très claires.

< previous page

page_278

next page >

< previous page

page_279

next page >

Page 279 La situation se complique du fait que nos critères d’identification… (etc.) The translation in Table 2.13, from the same book, also keeps too close to the original. Three points need to be made: first, the English noun reservation is here used in the sense of ‘limiting condition’, a meaning which is not congruent with that of French réserυe (‘attitude d’une personne discrète qui se garde de tout excès’) as used in the phrase aυec une certaine réserve. In this phrase réserυe corresponds to English reserυe rather than reservation . Second, there is a question of style involved here. While English reservation occurs fairly regularly in scholarly writing in the sense of ‘limiting condition’, French academic prose seems to prefer the noun prudence in such cases (whereas in colloquial French there is the phrase NP+est à prendre aυec réserve, which has a neat equivalent in German NP+ist mit Vorsicht zu genieβen). Third, the theme-rheme structure of the original could have been preserved by resorting to deυoir followed by the bare infinitive or être followed by the preposition à+INF. In this way the translation can be improved as follows: Ces résultats sont à considérer avec une certaine prudence. In a nutshell, Paquette and Roehner (1991), despite being native speakers of French, have fallen prey to interference from English in confusing the combinatorial properties of réserυe meaning doubt and réserve meaning reserve. An alternative way of resolving the ambiguity is to use réserve in the sense of doubt in combination with the verb appeler, again maintaining the original theme-rheme arrangement: Ces résultats appellent des réserves. This simple example shows that a principle detected by error analysis also applies to the translation of SLDMs: this principle holds that translators and second-language learners may be led astray not just by wide differences but also by close similarities between languages. Like the first of the above examples of English-French translation, the following extract from a German philosophy journal illustrates interference with the English SLDM the point is that: Table 2.13 The translation of an SLDM in Paquette and Roehner (1991:63) English original French translation These results should be viewed with some degree of *Il faudrait considérer ces résultats avec une certaine reservation. reserve.

< previous page

page_279

next page >

< previous page

page_280

next page >

Page 280 Vielleicht bemerken Sie eine kleine Steigerung Ihrer kognitiven Fähigkeiten… Als nächstes schneiden die Nanochirurgen ein zweites Gehirnstück heraus… *Der Punkt ist, daß Sie ihren Verstand so antreffen und ihn nie verlieren… The situation is much the same as in French. Although the phrase der Punkt ist, dass is sometimes used by speakers close to Anglo-American culture, it is not yet at home in academic German. A more natural rendition would be das Entscheidende dabei ist, dass . The following translation error is from the German translation of Capra’s well-known popular science book The Tao of Physics: Hier sollte vielleicht ein Wort der Vorsicht eingefügt werden. Die Betonung des Sehens (Schauens) in den mystischen Traditionen ist nicht allzu wörtlich, sondern in einem metaphorischen Sinne zu verstehen… (Capra 1983:33) Here too, the German translators have opted for a clumsily literal translation of what must have been an English restrictor based around the compound noun word of caution. In idiomatic German collocations with Wort can be classified into two main groups, namely (a) Wort+source of the word(s) in consideration: Wort des Herrn, Wort des Bundeskanzlers, Wort des Dichters, (b) Wort+content of the word(s) in consideration: Wort des Abschieds, Wort des Dankes, Wort der Erklärung, Wort der Entschuldigung. It might be argued that Wort der Vorsicht is a neologism based on group (b); however, the noun phrases in this group usually perform a summative function and have textexternal reference to a speech act which occurred before the moment of speaking or writing. The opposite is true of word of caution which cataphorically announces the passage it refers to (a word of caution is in order:…) . As shown in Siepmann (2001a), German restrictors serving the same function are normally based around verbs and integrated within the paragraph: Hier ist allerdings zu beachten, dass/hier möchte ich zu bedenken geben, dass/hier wäre allerdings zu bedenken/bei alldem ist zu bedenken, dass die Betonung des Schauens in den mystischen Traditionen nicht allzu wörtlich, sondern in einem metaphorischen Sinne zu verstehen ist… The following extract from the same book appears at the end of a chapter on Buddhism. It therefore has backward reference: Das Zentralthema des Avatamsaka ist die Einheit und der innere Zusammenhang aller Dinge und Ereignisse, eine Vorstellung, die

< previous page

page_280

next page >

< previous page

page_281

next page >

Page 281 nicht nur die eigentliche Essenz der östlichen Weltanschauung ist, sondern auch eines der Grundelemente der Weltanschauung der modernen Physik. Daher wird man sehen, daß das Avatamsaka-Sutra, dieser alte religiöse Text, die auffallendsten Parallelen zu den Modellen und Theorien der modernen Physik bietet. (Capra 1983:104) The English original must have contained an SLDM of the type thus it will be seen that, which cannot be translated literally into German, at least not when it has backward reference. A more idiomatic rendering would be daraus wird ersichtlich, dass or darin/damit zeigt sich, dass . Later in the same book we find the following passage: Statt dessen basiert die Relation zwischen Kräften und Partikeln auf einer speziellen Eigenschaft der S-Matrix, die international mit dem englischen Ausdruck ‘Crossing’ (‘Kreuzen’) bezeichnet wird. Um diese Eigenschaft zu erläutern, betrachten Sie das folgende Diagramm, das die Wechselwirkung zwischen einem Proton und einem II-darstellt. This is a clear case of ‘dangling’ reference, which makes it sound as if it is the reader who has to explain the property (Eigenschaft) in question. In German the intended meaning would normally be expressed thus: Diese Eigenschaft sei anhand eines Diagramms veranschaulicht, das die Wechselwirkung zwischen einem Proton und einem II-darstellt. Beyond such examples, it could be highly enlightening to look at a variety of renditions of one and the same marker in a translation corpus. Consider, for example, the French restrictor cela (ceci) dit . As discussed in Part I, Chapter 4, this is a particularly difficult marker to translate. Interestingly enough, it occurs only six times in the Multiconcord corpus, i.e. with a significantly lower frequency than in authentic French. This suggests that SLDMs may be underrepresented in translated texts because most translators are unable to evade source-language interference. It is also noteworthy that the rendition of cela (ceci) dit into German or English appears to be highly variable; again, this may be due to translators’ comparative unfamiliarity with these items. These tentative hypotheses would need to be tested with the help of larger translation corpora than are currently available. The translation errors presented here suggest that even confirmed translators, and the institutions which train them, tend to neglect SLDMs. Most of these errors can be accounted for in terms of interference from the source language, leading to clumsily literal renderings which are not in keeping with the textual conventions of the target language; this raises

< previous page

page_281

next page >

< previous page

page_282

next page >

Page 282 the question of how much ‘knowledge of textual patterns’ (‘Textmusterwissen’; Antos 1987, Stein 2001) the translator has and/or needs. More rarely, the translator fails to form an adequate understanding of the semantics and/or pragmatics of a particular SLDM, probably due to insufficient exposure to academic language and lack of guidance from dictionaries. 2.4 Conclusion The preceding sections have thrown up plausible evidence that even very advanced learners of English experience severe difficulties in using both first-level and second-level markers in a native-like manner. They tend to employ these connectors with widely differing frequencies from natives and, probably due to insufficient exposure, fail to perceive them as relatively fixed patterns. As a consequence, they often modify them in unnatural ways. Sometimes such modification may be traced back to the overlearning of seemingly context-independent patterns, as in the case of *this might suggest+ing . At other times, learners seem to erroneously extend the scope of the ‘open-choice’ principle, as can be perceived from such mistakes as *several caveats are in place. Evidence from published translations completes this still rather sketchy picture. Translators can be shown to succumb to source-language interference when it comes to translating SLDMs. Two reasons may account for this: first, non-natives may find it difficult to recognize SLDMs and hence to memorize them; in other words, they cannot tell an SLDM from a free combination of words and therefore treat it in terms of general lexico-grammatical rules. Second, there are practically no teaching materials on SLDMs, and they are rarely discussed in foreign language and translation classrooms. These results concur with evidence from a number of interlingual studies that L2 writers of English use a significantly lower number of conventional expressions. Howarth (1993) rightly suggests that this has consequences for nonnative style, which may appear more difficult to read than native style. All this goes to show that there is an acute need for providing teachers and students with tools which give SLDMs their just attention and thereby raise general awareness of such phraseology. The next chapter, accordingly, will be devoted to lexicographic tools.

< previous page

page_282

next page >

< previous page

page_283

next page >

Page 283 3 Lexicographic treatment of SLDMs The preceding chapter has demonstrated that L2 writing is often characterized by varying degrees of unnaturalness in SLDM use. Such foreignness has been shown to be traceable to two main causes—namely, (a) inadequate frequency of use of particular items and (b) straightforward errors. It was also demonstrated how, indirectly, errors can give insight into the complexities of SLDM use by revealing features of semantic prosody, verb valency and the like. Such features are not dealt with in any exhaustive manner by current dictionaries, so that even learners with good research skills would not be able to avoid errors in SLDM use by consulting their dictionaries. This, as well as the general neglect of SLDMs by lexicographers, makes it necessary to address issues related to their inclusion in dictionaries, which is the subject of the present chapter. Section 3.1 considers depth of coverage in the largest of current dictionaries. Section 3.2 explores the macrostructural and microstructural treatment of SLDMs and makes suggestions for improving current practice. It discusses factors governing the selection of SLDMs, organizing principles, entry structures, the provision of metalinguistic information and issues associated with exemplification. Flowing from this discussion, Section 3.3 will then make recommendations on sample entries for various types of dictionaries. 3.1 Lexicographic coverage of SLDMs This section deals with the coverage given SLDMs in works of reference. I start with a look at unabridged monolingual and bilingual dictionaries in current use1 before considering vocabulary books. 3.1.1 Full-size monolingual and bilingual dictionaries The difficulties involved in recording pragmatic multi-word markers in monolingual or bilingual dictionaries are notorious. As Sinclair writes: Dictionaries have the greatest difficulty in handling pragmatic meaning because there are too many variables, and the meaning may

< previous page

page_283

next page >

< previous page

page_284

next page >

Page 284 not be associated with any particular word or phrase. If the item to be defined is unstable in form, then even indexing it alphabetically is a problem. Dictionaries already have trouble with idioms and set phrases that involve more than one word, even when all the constituent words are clearly identified… Nevertheless, we expect to find in a dictionary a list of the units of meaning in a language. (Sinclair 1993:10) Markers of comparison and equation, to take just one example, provide striking confirmation of Sinclair’s views. Where in the dictionary should a phrase like the same goes for be entered? How can the user be cross-referred to the broad range of equivalent expressions, such as similarly with/for, likewise, the same can be said of, the same holds true for, the same remarks apply to (etc.)? To complicate matters, the sometimes numerous pragmatic functions of discourse markers cannot easily be illustrated within the limited compass of a dictionary. With this in mind, it is little wonder that even the largest of native-speaker dictionaries contain hardly any entries on SLDMs or, for that matter, routinized expressions generally. A rapid scroll through the OED CD-ROM’s phrase list, apart from a few obsolete phrases such as it is voiced or it is noised, yields only the following: it cannot be questioned, there is no question, it is no question, it is questionable whether, it is rarely that, it is rare that, it is said that, it is to be wondered (rare), there is no saying, there is no knowing, it only goes to show, it may easily happen that, it figures that, it remains to be seen, it remains that or to (+infinitive), it is said/written/ stated/thought/believed that, it says (archaic or colloquial), it appears that (s.v. it), it should seem, it would seem, one should think, it stands to reason, it stands to sense, suffice it to say, another pair of shoes Somewhat surprisingly for a dictionary of this size, some expressions in common use that go to make up SLDMs (e.g. it behoυes me/us ) have not been recorded in the phrase list. As Gates (1988:99) puts it, this ‘may reflect an unconscious feeling by the lexicographer that a dictionary is a book that explains words, and that vocabulary items larger than the word are beyond its scope’, an attitude which becomes particularly questionable when one considers the reference needs of language learners. Moving on to the four most commonly used monolingual English learner’s dictionaries (the Collins Cobuild English Dictionary, the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, the Cambridge International Dictionary of English and the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English), we are faced with very much the same picture. SLDMs are almost totally ignored by what in all other respects are superb accomplishments of corpus-based lexicography; some of the phrases entered in the OED have been recorded here, too,

< previous page

page_284

next page >

< previous page

page_285

next page >

Page 285 but beyond this only a few rare instances, most of which are also common in spoken English, can be located. Examples are now for, so much for or it is worth remembering/mentioning . With regard to coverage of SLDMs, the large French desk dictionaries are also far from complete. At best, they include parts of common SLDMs, such as il conυient de, or multi-word items which can conveniently be recorded at single-word entries, such as il ne fait pas de doute que . Examples of the latter type to be found in the Grand Robert (1985) are: il n’y a pas de doute que; il ne fait pas de doute que; point de doute que; nul doute que (+subjunctive); il est hors de doute que (+indicative); là est la question; c’est toute la question; c’est une autre question; il ne sera pas question de; reste à jeter un coup d’oeil sur; ce qu’il resterait à dire; il nous reste à entretenir le lecteur de notre ouvrage; il reste (le fait) que; il n’en reste pas moins que; reste que; toujours est-il que; il reste certain que; il faut noter que; il est à noter que; il est intéressant (curieux) de noter que; notez que; notez bien que; notez ici que; il est permis de faire observer que; on observe, dans tel cas…; quoi qu’on dise; on doit reconnaître que; ce disant; ceci dit; soit dit en passant; on dirait que; il semble que; on dit que (le bruit court que); c’est tout dire; c’est tout dit; Qu’en dit Littré?; ou, pour mieux dire; misérable, ou, disons mieux, misérable et…; qui dit…dit…; ce n’est pas à dire pour cela que (=cela n’équivaut pas à…); pour ne (n’en) citer qu’un (seul) exemple; considérons, par exemple, ce cas; il est vrai néanmoins que; comme on (le) sait; on sait que; on sait assez que; tout le monde sait; qui ne sait que; l’expérience nous montre que (s.v. montrer); comme on le voit; comme on peut le voir The fairly large number of entries should not obscure the fact that some of the SLDMs recorded are not recognized as such. Ceci dit, for example, is defined only as ayant dit ces mots and exemplified by the sentence ceci dit, il s’en alla. Il faut bien reconnaître que is cross-referenced to se rendre à l’éυidence, but the entry for évidence makes no mention of the discourse device in which this expression usually occurs: il faut se rendre à l’éυidence (normally followed by a colon). Some of the items recorded have a distinctly archaic ring to them, but carry no style labels to that effect; ce qu’il resterait à dire is a case in point. On the other hand, a concession marker like il est υrai néanmoins que, although attested by a quotation from La Bruyère, is still in current use today. A very similar situation exists with the full-size bilingual dictionaries. I tested the English-French, English-German, German-French and German-English sections of seven dictionaries for coverage of 20 very common SLDMs, ten of which were English and the other ten German. The English discourse devices are all possible renderings of the German

< previous page

page_285

next page >

< previous page

page_286

next page >

Page 286 Table 3.1 SLDM coverage in bilingual dictionaries (−=item not recorded, *=unacceptable translation, (?) =translation of doubtful acceptability) SLDM Langenscheidts Pons The Collins German Langenscheidts Muret-Sanders Handörterbuch Groβwörterbuch Dictionary (1997) HandwörterbuchGroβwörterbuch Franzöisch Französisch Englisch (1995) Englisch (1979) (1995) (1996) 1es ist/steht zu — — it may be supposed — it is to be presumed vermuten,dass that (?) , we may that (?)/it must be assume/ presume assumed that (?) that 2halten wir fest: — — — — — 3vieles spricht, dass/es —a — there is every —b many facts indicate spricht vieles dafür, reason to believe that (?) dass that (?)c 4gleiches gilt für —d — the same goes for the same the same holds good applies to ( F for goes for) 5anders verhält es sich — — —e — — mit 6womit wir bei (NP) — — — — — wären 7vereinfacht — — — — — gesprochen/ gesagt 8zur Erinerung: — — — — — 9der Vollständigkeit pour compléter pour être to complete the for the sake of for the sake of halber (quelque chose) complet, pour picture completeness completeness, to ne rien laisser complete things/the de côté whole (?) 10man beachte, dass — — — — — (here in the sense of ‘es ist bemerkenswert, dass’)

< previous page

page_286

next page >

< previous page Page 287 SLDM

Le Robert & Collins Senior (1993) 1 we may guess that — 2 to sum up en résumé/pour récapituler 3 to use X’s term /in — X’s words

next page >

page_287 Oxford Hachette The Collins German French Dictionary Dictionary (1997) (2001) — — pour récapituler/ zusammenfassend en résumé /als Resümee (?)

Langenscheidts Handwörterbuch Engisch (1995) — —

Muret-Sanders Großwörterbuch Englisch (1979) — —

pour reprendre l’expression de

—

mit den Worten (gen)

mit Goethe gesprochen, um mit Goethe zu sprechen — — —

4 similarly with — — — — 5 it is different with — — — — 6 this brings us/me to— ceci m’amène à — — NP la question de 7 simply put (stated) — — — — — 8 to recap (itulate) — — — — — 9 for completeness — — — — — /for the sake of completeness 10note that — — — — — a Note, however, the following items: alles spricht dafür, dass=tout semble indiquer que; alle Anzeichen sprechen dafür=tout Porte à croire que. b Note, however, the following item: alles spricht dafür, dass=all the evidence seems to indicate that, it looks very much as if c There is every reason to assume/believe/think/suppose that indicate a higher degree of certainty than vieles/einiges spricht dafür, dass and thus translate as alles spricht dafür, dass. d Note the following translation equivalence: das gleiche gilt für=c’est pareil/la mZme chose pour, which is viable only for the spoken language. e Note, however, the following item: damit verhält es sich anders=the situation is different, where the dictionary user only needs to add the preposition with to obtain a satisfactory solution.

< previous page

page_287

next page >

< previous page

page_288

next page >

Page 288 ones, with the exception of item 3. I refrained from including the English equivalents of υieles spricht dafür, dass because these vary according to whether the German SLDM is used epistemically or deontically: there is a (clear/compelling/conυincing/good/powerful/strong/unanswerabk) case for (+gerund), there is much to suggest that, there is much to be said for (+gerund), there is much to be said for the argument that, there are good reasons for believing/thinking/assuming that, there are good reasons why, etc., and I selected the commoner items to use X’s term/in X’s words instead. The results of this spot check are shown in Table 3.1. The results shown in Table 3.1 speak for themselves: today’s bilingual dictionaries are still a long way from giving SLDMs adequate treatment, and there is no significant difference in coverage between language pairs. With four correct renderings out of ten and another not far out, The Collins German Dictionary shapes up best among all the dictionaries examined. The Oxford Hachette French Dictionary also has three workable equivalents to offer. All other dictionaries have two acceptable translations at the most. One may speculate that this is because lexicographers have so far viewed SLDMs as rule-based strings of words with little or no individual meaning or function. Their central importance for non-native writers and translators has been overlooked. A cursory glance at some of the target-language renditions shows that unidirectional translations rather than targetlanguage corpus enquiries have served as the source of data. The translation of es ist zu υermuten, dass by it may be supposed that in Collins German Dictionary is a case in point; close reading of authentic texts shows such renderings as it is a fair/good guess that, it is fair/reasonable to assume that, it is easy/reasonable to suppose that, it is a reasonable assumption that or we may guess that to be far more common. A redeeming feature of The Collins German Dictionary and Le Robert & Collins Senior is that their essay writing sections contain a fair amount of SLDMs. Of those not found in the above spot check, four (in s.o.’s words; to sum up; to recap; es steht zu υermuten, dass) can be located in this part of the The Collins German Dictionary, bringing the total score for this reference work to a remarkable seven out of 20 (although, of course, the translation proposals are by no means exhaustive). For a detailed listing of the items in question, the reader is referred to my website. To summarize: the full-size native-speaker dictionaries, most bilingual dictionaries and the monolingual learner’s dictionaries are all surprisingly patchy in their coverage of SLDMs. The authors of these works miss many hundreds of common discourse devices, probably because their overriding concern is with the single word. 3.1.2 Vocabulary books and dictionaries of connectors The situation is somewhat different with the few vocabulary books and dictionaries of connectors specifically designed for foreign language com-

< previous page

page_288

next page >

< previous page

page_289

next page >

Page 289 position. Notably, Dietrich and Guerrier (1990), a modest word-book for French learners of German, is the single most fruitful source of SLDMs I was able to find. In keeping with the general thrust of research into fixed expressions, the authors stress that they are dealing not with phrases to be tacked onto a piece of text but with free patterns allowing the student to present ideas and establish logical links between these: Attention! Il ne s’agit là nullement d’expressions destinées à être plaquées sur un discours, mais bien de structures ouvertes, permettant d’exposer des idées et d’établir des liens logiques entre elles. (Dietrich and Guerrier 1990:2) The book tries to bring together German phrases with related meaning, listing them under such broad headings as ‘Der Ausgangspunkt’ (the starting point), ‘Die nähere Betrachtung’ (closer examination), ‘Das Erstaunen’ (astonishment). This categorization by topic, however, is not always fully consistent.2 The French translations provided by Dietrich and Guerrier do not lay any claims to authenticity; rather, they are supposed to help learners get their semantic bearings. In an appreciable number of cases they do indeed leave much to be desired. I have marked doubtful renderings with two question marks. The main difficulty here seems to lie in the ad hoc translation of context-dependent items. In striking contrast, almost all the German example sentences have a highly authentic ring to them. The book thus demonstrates the dangers of a purely monolingual approach. Another vocabulary book offering a reasonable harvest of SLDMs and related semi-fixed expressions is Paquette and Roehner (1991). As can be seen from the examples tabulated below, the authors have manually teased out some useful words and phrases from a number of Anglo-American science texts, here and there preferring less common types over standard ones. Let me provide a very concrete example and a criticism we would raise is that are cases in point. Unfortunately, the authors fail to draw the reader’s attention to the systematic behaviour of such items. Worse, Paquette and Roehner, being French natives, were probably not aware that some of the English items recorded are of doubtful acceptability and should not really be held up as models for non-native writers. For example, as typical of all these… we shall consider…, used to introduce an example, seems an incorrect blend of as an example of…, we shall consider and we shall consider… as typical of… As in Dietrich and Guerrier (1990), some of the translations have an awkward ring to them or are textually inadequate (see Table 3.2). Grieve (1996) discusses and exemplifies a wide range of French connectors, including a fair number of SLDMs, and offers English translation equivalents for some of these. While his analysis of the French connectors abounds in fertile insights, the intralingual correspondences he sets up

< previous page

page_289

next page >

< previous page

page_290

next page >

Page 290 Table 3.2 Some SLDMs in Paquette and Roehner (1991) English SLDM Suggested French translation the primary objective of this paper is to the basic le principal objectif de cet article est de l’idée de base est de idea is that Let me provide a very concrete example of On peut donner un exemple simple et très concret A counterexample is seen in the case of… un contre-exemple est constitue par… There is no reason to assume that… a criticism we il n’y a pas de raison de supposer que… une critique que l’on would raise is that pourrait faire est que can frequently be improved upon (see Part I, Chapter 4, for examples). Table 3.3 shows a list of the major entries containing SLDMs to be found in Grieve, with English translations. In summary, we can say that a tiny segment of the vocabulary book market caters for the writer searching for SLDMs or translations thereof. However, even here, what translations can be located suggest that context has not been given consideration as an important factor in determining SLDM usage. Only in Grieve (1996) do we find detailed guidance on the use of discourse devices in connected pieces of writing. 3.2 Macrostructural and microstructural treatment of SLDMs This section starts by looking at the macrostructural and microstructural treatment of SLDMs in various types of dictionary. It will then make suggestions for improvement. The lexicographical treatment of phraseology, including SLDMs, may be expected to differ according to whether we are dealing with dictionaries for encoding or for decoding on the one hand, and for natives or for L2 learners on the other. The dictionary user I have in mind in this and the following sections is the advanced learner of English and the translator, who have reached a stage in language learning allowing them to envisage using SLDMs in their written production. Accordingly, the dictionaries which engage our attention are unabridged monolingual or bilingual dictionaries and unabridged learners’ dictionaries. These two types of dictionaries are ‘hybrid’ reference books catering for the encoding and decoding needs of both natives and foreigners (Kjaer 1987:165ff., cited in Burger 1989). It is my contention that, with regard to SLDMs, budding native academic writers may have encoding needs not dissimilar to those of advanced foreign-born writers. This is evident from the kind of language material sometimes offered in L1 writing textbooks.

< previous page

page_290

next page >

< previous page

page_291

next page >

Page 291 Table 3.3 SLDMs in Grieve (1996) French SLDM à ceci près que ainsi

Suggested English translation with the difference that for example; in this way; therefore; thus; so ajoutons que, disons, prenons le cas de, qu’on nous in addition permette de à la vérité to tell the truth; to be precise à savoir (que) namely; i.e. autant dire que might as well; just about autrement dit; en d’autres termes in other words au vrai actually; really; to be precise avec, à la clé with bref; en un mot; en résumé; en somme; en clair in short cela va de soi; cela va sans dire; c’est clair (etc.) needless to say ce faisant thereby; in so doing dans la foulée while you’re about it cela/ceci dit that said cela est si vrai que — cela étant that being the case; that being so; in that case c’est dire que — c’est le cas de — c’est un fait que — de toute façon; de toute manière — en contrepartie — encore faut-il →up to a point; as far as it goes; that’s all very well en la circonstance; en l’espèce; en l’occurrence in this instance/case force est de — (tant) il est vrai que →admittedly; granted; of course; true; of course; after all; as is well known il faut dire que it is true that; the fact is; the point is il n’est que de/il n’y a qu’à — le fait est que — (ne) fût-ce (que) if only; even though only n’empêche — pis; qui pis est; il y a pis furthermore; in addition; worse (still) reste finally; lastly reste à →‘remain’ reste que — si l’on veut if you like; if you prefer; or rather sinon; voire even toujours est-il que all the same; anyway; none the less tout se passe comme si one could be forgiven for thinking that

< previous page

page_291

next page >

< previous page

page_292

next page >

Page 292 3.2.1 Selection and classification systems Ideally, selection should be preceded by inventorying. While today’s lexicographers can rely on computerized corpora to provide a near-exhaustive inventory of single words, things are less straightforward with SLDMs. As long as there are no megacorpora from which SLDMs can be extracted automatically, the lexicographer has to fall back on the procedure described in Part I of this study, alternating pen-and-paper analysis with computer-driven enquiries in an iterative cycle. After a large inventory has been set up, the computer corpus can be queried to determine the frequency of each inventoried item (see Part I, Chapter 4). It can then be decided which items to include in the dictionary by defining an arbitrary frequency threshold. Turning now to classification systems for dictionaries, we find that the two most widely used procedures for arranging lexical information are also applicable to the treatment of SLDMs. That is, much as single words can be classified either by the alphabet or by subject, so SLDMs can be listed alphabetically or categorized by function. SLDMs being multi-word units, alphabetical arrangement raises the issue of place of entry (see Section 3.2.2). Conceptual or functional categorization, on the other hand, may make retrieval difficult because categories are never entirely watertight. Ease of access can be enhanced, however, by providing alphabetical indexes referring the dictionary user to the category associated with each item, as is standard practice in thesauruses. The advantage of conceptual categorization is twofold: from the lexicographer’s standpoint, synonymy can be handled in a clear and space-saving manner (see Schemann 1991 as an example of a conceptually arranged phraseological dictionary). From the user’s standpoint, the acquisition of new language material becomes considerably easier; this is because conceptual arrangement accords more closely with the ways in which words are stored in the mental lexicon (see Aitchison 1994). Both conceptual and alphabetic categorization will be exemplified below. 3.2.2 Place of entry and description Since neither linguists nor lexicographers have so far paid SLDMs much attention, it is not surprising that none of the available English, French and German dictionaries proffer a consistent policy on the location or description of these items. As a consequence, the macrostructural and microstructural placement of SLDMs varies both from one dictionary to another and within the same dictionary. In what follows I shall first provide a brief overview of current practice before discussing whether it is possible to overcome whatever arbitrariness still resides in the treatment of SLDMs.

< previous page

page_292

next page >

< previous page

page_293

next page >

Page 293 3.2.2.1 An overview of current practice I shall consider three typical examples of current practice, starting with an unabridged monolingual dictionary (Grand Robert) , then moving on to an unabridged learners’ dictionary (Collins Cobuild English Dictionary) and concluding with a large bilingual dictionary (Harrap’s French Dictionary) . In the Grand Robert (1985), which offers a sprinkling of SLDMs (see Section 3.1), the exemplifier pour n’en citer qu’un exemple is found as the second example under sub-entry II.2: (XIVe). Cas, événement particulier, chose précise qui entre dans (une catégorie, un genre…) et qui sert à confirmer, illustrer, préciser (un concept). Voici un exemple de sa bêtise. Pour ne (n’en) citer qu’un (seul) exemple. Aperçu, échantillon, spécimen. Ce cas offre un exemple typique de telle maladie.→Type. C’est un bel exemple de présence d’esprit! Alléguer, apporter des exemples à l’appui d’une assertion, d’une affirmation.→Preuve. Exemple concret illustrant une idée abstraite. Appuyer (cit. 5) d’un exemple. Exemples donnés dans un manuel de physique, de chimie. Exemple bien, mal choisi. Donnez-moi un exemple de υolcan éteint, de plissement tertiaire. Exemples à l’appui d’un raisonnement, d’une démonstration. Exemple qui prouυe que… Il m’a cité l’exemple de ce chanteur (→1. Basse, cit. 7). Puiser ses exemples dans l’histoire (→Égoïsme, cit. 1). ( Le Grand Robert, s.v. exemple) The SLDM in question has been entered as an example sentence followed by a full stop. This implies that the phrase can stand on its own, thus obscuring its textual function and potentially leading at least the foreign-born user astray. Similarly, the concession marker il faut bien reconnaître que is submerged amid a welter of detail within one of the sub-entries for reconnaître. The specific pragmatic function of the marker is not made explicit; rather, it must be inferred from the general definition given under sense division 4 of reconnaître or from its synonymy with the evidence marker il faut se rendre à l’éυidence, to which the reader is cross-referred: 4. (XIVe). Admettre pour vrai après avoir nié, ou après avoir douté, accepter malgré des réticences. →Admettre, avérer, déclarer… On a fini par reconnaître son innocence. → Croire (à); →aussi Rendre hommage* à… On est forcé de reconnaître des divergences (cit. 1) entre certains textes… Maintes fois, il le reconnaît lui-même, il manquait de bon sens (→Grain, cit. 26). Reconnaître la supériorité de qqn. →Céder (3.: le céder à); proclamer… Amener qqn à reconnaître. → Convaincre. Reconnaître que. →Admettre, avouer, convenir (de);→Boiteux, cit. 7; démarche, cit. 4; Dieu, cit. 47; malheur, cit. 39; oracle, cit. 4. Ils ont tous reconnu qu’il a fait ce qu’il a pu. →Tomber (d’accord). Vous

< previous page

page_293

next page >

< previous page

page_294

next page >

Page 294 n’hésiterez (cit. 14) pas à reconnaître que… Je reconnais que …→Accorder; entendre (j’entends bien).— Quoi qu’on dise, on doit reconnaître que… (—Canaille, cit. 12). Force (cit. 58) lui était de reconnaître que… (—Exciter, cit. 32). Il faut bien, on doit reconnaître que …→Évidence (se rendre à l’évidence);→Mélodique, cit. 1. In a small number of entries, the SLDM has been set off from the rest of the relevant sub-entry by the abbreviation spécialt. (= spécialement), signalling that the lemma is being used in a more restricted sense. In the following case, there is even some explanation of the function of the SLDM concerned: Spécialt. Il est υrai que…: sans doute* (s’emploie pour introduire une atténuation, une restriction ou une correction à ce qu’on vient de dire).→Abattre, cit. 1; austère, cit. 3; oeuf, cit. 7. Very rarely are SLDMs given a separate sub-entry, but this is the case with SLDMs based around the noun doute. The reason, however, is not that the lexicographers wish to draw attention to the pragmatic features of these expressions; rather, they provide grammatical guidance on the use of the subjunctive. Sometimes, then, there appears to be some recognition of the SLDM’s status as a fixed expression, as is the case with the concession marker il est υrai que above or with the summarizer à tout bien considérer, highlighted by) the metalinguistic label Loc. (=locution): 2. Envisager* par un examen attentif, critique. →Apprécier, approfondir, étudier, examiner, observer, peser. Considérer le pour et le contre, impartialement. →Balancer. Considérer une chose sous tous ses aspects. Considérer des faits en detail. Isoler* un élément pour mieux le considérer. C’est une raison qu’il faut considérer en elle-même. Considérer l’étendue de son malheur. Considérer dans son ensemble, de haut. Considérer l’aυenir*. Manière de considérer. →Opinion, vue (point de vue). Loc. à tout bien considérer… : en considérant tous les aspects de la question… Again, the SLDM is relegated to the very end of a sub-entry. Like the examples it is printed in italics, thus ultimately giving it a hybrid status somewhere between a phrase illustrative of the use of considérer 2 and a fixed expression in its own right. In the following entry, too, the items on sait que and comme on le sait are lumped together under one sense-division with the figurative expression Dieu sait: B. (Sens affaibli, dans des expressions surtout impératives, interrogatives, négatives). 1. être au courant de, être au fait de. Comme on (le) sait (→Ciel, cit.

< previous page

page_294

next page >

< previous page

page_295

next page >

Page 295 45). C’est, comme υous saυez… (→1. Apostrophe, cit. 1). On sait que… (→Formaliste, cit. 1), on sait assez que… Tout le monde sait (→Moindre, cit. 2). Qui ne sait que… (→Disposer, cit. 13).— Vous n’êtes pas sans saυoir que: υous n’ignorez pas que…—Ils υotent tu sais comment (→Aveuglette, cit. 2). (V. 1050). DIEU SAIT…, introduit un fait qu’on présente comme connu de Dieu (vrai, sûr) ou encore comme caché des hommes.—Dieu (infra cit. 50). Dieu sait comme.→Comme.—Par anal. Le diable sait… (—Mettre, cit. 73) In a treatment similar to that accorded the exemplifier pour ne citer qu’un exemple, on sait que has been listed under the sense ‘être au courant de’, with no indication of its pragmatic function as an advance label high-lighting the uncontroversial nature of the matrix clause. In striking contrast, the advance label Dieu sait…, probably on account of its more ‘idiomatic’ status, has been adequately glossed. If we now turn to the Collins Cobuild English Dictionary (Sinclair 1995), we find that it has equally little to offer in the way of SLDMs, but the user who is willing to invest time and effort may spot the occasional item among the exemplificatory material. Among the example sentences at the second sub-entry for example (‘an example of a particular class of objects or styles is something that has many of the typical features of such a class or style, and that you consider clearly represents it’) we find: The plaque illustrated in Figure 1 is an example of his work at this time. As I have argued in Part I, such wordings have a quasi-pragmatic function, which becomes more evident if we recast the above as ‘consider, as an example of his work at this time, the plaque illustrated in Figure l’. This pragmatic function has been overlooked by the lexicographers. At the same time such a function is explicitly ascribed to the first-level marker for example, which appears as sub-entry 3. Alongside it, the label Pragmatics’ appears in an extra column, signalling that for example has a special discoursal function, and the item itself has been skilfully incorporated into its definition: You use for example to introduce and emphasize something that illustrates a point you are making, or that supports an argument, theory, or opinion. As shown in Part I, Chapter 4, similar considerations are valid for SLDMs containing the noun example, so that definitions of this kind may accompany SLDMs in future lexicographic work (see pp. 111–140). With an SLDM like we now turn to the situation is even less clear. It appears in the exemplificatory material at subentry 12 for turn and is not explicitly marked as a fixed expression:

< previous page

page_295

next page >

< previous page

page_296

next page >

Page 296 We turn now to the British news. This example sentence may, however, not be very useful to learners, suggesting as it does an ad hoc formation possibly restricted to news broadcasts, whereas in fact it is a transitional device that can be employed in both spoken and written English. Similar considerations hold true for the digression marker it should be noted in passing that (etc.), which is found as an example under a sub-entry at passing: In passing, it should be noted that… Besides lacking context, this example is unfortunate in presenting a marked version of the digression marker in which the adverbial in passing has been fronted. Finally, let us consider an unabridged bilingual dictionary. Harrap’s French Dictionary (2001) boasts ‘over 900,000 words, phrases, and translations of French as it is used today’, but, as with the other dictionaries under review here, there is only a very small crop of SLDMs. At the entry for rester, a sub-entry is given over to the impersonal uses of this verb. Among a number of free combinations (e.g. il reste encore quelques minutes ), the user here finds the variable SLDM (il) reste à saυoir si with its English equivalent it remains to be seen whether, with no further exemplification or guidance. The case is otherwise with the one-word SLDM soit, which is given two separate entries ( soit 2 and 3). The entry starts with the gloss ‘a savoir’ followed by the translation equivalents that is and ie as well as two example sentences with translations: 2. (à saυoir) that is, ie; toutes mes économies, ~200 francs all my savings, ie ou that is, 200 francs; il y a dix gâteaux, ~deux chacun there are ten cakes, ie ou that is, two each. Although this entry is neither exempt from errors nor complete (the spoken style of the example sentences would seem to exclude ie as a rendering; there are other renderings of soit such as or [see Part I, Chapter 4]), it is a laudable attempt at according a common discourse marker the dictionary space it deserves. The same is true of soit 3: 3. Math~un triangle ABC let ABC be a triangle This entry seems sufficient for most purposes. Its only defect is the incorrect use of the field label Math for ‘mathematics’. As is evident from the exemplification in Part I, Chapter 4, this use of soit is also found in other academic disciplines such as linguistics or philosophy.

< previous page

page_296

next page >

< previous page

page_297

next page >

Page 297 The above overview of location policy in current dictionaries has shown that many SLDMs figure inappropriately among general exemplificatory material, with the one exception of single-word SLDMs. Thus, despite great progress in lexicography, the realization has not yet sunk in that there are many more relatively fixed expressions than previously assumed and that this domain extends beyond traditional phraseology (i.e. idioms, proverbs, binomials, etc.). For the user this means that the few items which have been entered are difficult to locate and will not normally be perceived as having a specific discoursal function. 3.2.2.2 Suggestions for improvement This section presents a number of suggestions for overcoming the defects of the organizing policies seen above. One of the most obvious desiderata is for the SLDM to be given entry status. Rather than appear in the exemplificatory material, it should itself be illustrated with examples as necessary. As with any multi-word unit, two basic questions then arise (see, for example, Gates 1988): 1 At which word in the SLDM should the entry appear? 2 Should the SLDM be a main entry or a sub-entry? In the resolution of the first question there is a wide range of possibilities. The policy of many dictionaries is to enter variable expressions such as idioms at the first notional word, although the validity of such terms as English ‘notional’ or German ‘autosemantisch’ has been called into doubt (for a discussion, see Brauße 1992). Thus, the idioms all hell breaks loose and out of a clear blue sky would be found respectively at hell and clear. There are a number of possible alternatives to this organizing schema. For example: 1 Phrasemes may be arranged alphabetically by their first components. 2 Phrasemes may be entered at the semantically most important component. 3 Phrasemes may be entered at the grammatically most important component. One wonders whether the second and third of these schemas will always lead to an unequivocal solution, as lexicographers’ and users’ views on what is semantically and grammatically ‘most important’ may differ. For the sake of user convenience, it is desirable to enter a phraseme under each of its meaning components and to cross-refer the user to the place where the entry is found. Drawing on this insight, Petermann (1983) has devised a consistent location policy. He suggests that each phraseme

< previous page

page_297

next page >

< previous page

page_298

next page >

Page 298 should appear under each of its notional components while being assigned only to one main entry. The choice of this entry is to be determined by the following criteria: if the phraseme contains a noun, this becomes the main entry; if there are several nouns, main entry is given to the first. If there is no noun, main entry is given to the first adjective, etc., in the following order: verb, adverb, pronoun, numeral, interjection. The second of the above questions (‘Should the SLDM be a main entry or a sub-entry?’) has, as seen in the previous section, been settled rather arbitrarily in lexicographic practice. There are equally good reasons for giving main entry to SLDMs and other phrasemes as there are for recording them under a sub-entry, whether this be a separate entry or a sense division of a particular headword (Burger 1998:172). In an overview article on phraseological dictionaries Burger (1989:595) suggests recording different types of phrasemes in different ways. Fully idiomatic phrasemes are to be listed under one of their components only, with cross-references at the entries for other components; the choice of the entry term should not be governed by semantic considerations, as these require the largest amount of previous knowledge on the part of the user. Partially idiomatic phrasemes which are linked to a specific meaning of a headword are to be treated under the relevant sense division. Non-idiomatic phrasemes have to be discussed at each of their components, under the relevant senses. Although presenting the clear advantage of highlighting connections of meaning, this arrangement is theoretically unsound in that it presupposes the semantic divisibility of the phraseme and may entail an etymological re-motivation of what is only a partially motivated or unmotivated phraseme (cf. Burger 1989:595). A further complicating factor, at least from the user’s standpoint, is that the nesting of partially idiomatic phrasemes may make retrieval difficult. The most straightforward solution to this problem would seem to consist in drawing phraseological items together in blocks at the end of the entry. But then again such clustering may be difficult to justify with clearly motivated SLDMs like there is good reason to+INF; there is a strong case here for treatment under the relevant sense division of reason . Such examples could be multiplied. From all this it seems reasonable to conclude, as most theorists do (cf. for example Burger 1989:595), that there is no ready-made solution for the positioning of SLDMs. Each case requires to be considered on its own merits; there should be neither consistent conflation into end-of-article nests nor arbitrary allocation to a particular sense division. Rather, as with compounds and derivatives (cf. Cowie 1999:150), it is inevitable to steer a middle course between considerations of semantic relatedness, user convenience, and economy of treatment. In any case, however, SLDMs should be highlighted typographically, and attention should be drawn to their special pragmatic and/or textstructuring function. One final question needs to be raised here: it was seen in Part I that

< previous page

page_298

next page >

< previous page

page_299

next page >

Page 299 there are polysemous, or rather ‘polyfunctional SLDMs; how should these be treated? To give just one example, the French SLDM on suppose que has at least two different functions or meanings. In the first of the following quotations it introduces a logical premise; in the second it signals an assumption or supposition: Les constructions à l’infinitif proposent un autre type de disjonction: celle qu’on propose entre les positions réalisées de la sequence et les propriétés interprétatives. Il n’y a pas de sujet réalisé devant l’infinitif. Mais on suppose qu’il y a un sujet dans la structure, dans la mesure où des propriétés de sujet sont attribuables à une position, sans qu’il y ait d’unité lexicale dans cette position. (CAF) Du mois de juillet au mois de décembre 1791, Chateaubriand séjourne en Amérique du Nord. On suppose qu’il rapporta de ce long voyage des notes d’où sortiront, pendant l’exil de l’auteur en Angleterre (1793–1800), un grand «manuscrit américain» qui donnera naissance à Atala, à René, aux Natchez, et à cet incongru Voyage en Amérique, compose d’un récit proprement dit et d’une longue partie descriptive, où Chateaubriand puise à de nombreuses sources (le Précis de géographie uniυerselle de Malte-Brun; la Découυerte des sources du Mississippi de Beltrami, etc.). CAF) In such cases it would seem necessary to assign each of the SLDM’s functions to a separate (sub)entry, as is established practice in the case of polysemous lexemes. 3.2.3 Metalinguistic information Most dictionaries contain various categories of metalinguistic information (see e.g. Landau 1984:76–115). This section discusses the relevance of the most essential of these categories to SLDMs. It would be well to remember that the target audience envisaged here is the advanced language learner and the translator rather than the native speaker and that the languages concerned are English, French and German. As we shall see, encoding dictionaries for this target audience should furnish explicit information on a number of points which are of minor interest to the native speaker: 1 Phonetic information Most present-day dictionaries give pronunciations and indicate stress; clearly marginal to SLDM usage, this kind of information may nevertheless be useful in an alphabetically arranged dictionary with regard to rare items such as it behoυes me/us or SLDMs such as be that as it may where the correct stress pattern may not be immediately evident to learners from some L1 backgrounds. 2 Grammatical information All large dictionaries provide main entries

< previous page

page_299

next page >

< previous page

page_300

next page >

Page 300 with part-of-speech labels, but there also various other types of grammatical information: in languages which have gender, for example, nouns are usually marked for this; in inflectional languages such as German, nouns are marked for type of declension; most monolingual and bilingual dictionaries offer guidance on verb, noun and adjective patterns (i.e. internal and external valency) as well as indicating class membership for nouns (i.e. mass noun, count/uncount noun, etc.), and so on. The list could easily be lengthened, but it is sufficient for our purposes to note that the treatment of SLDMs mainly requires information on patterning and morpho-syntactic variation. This is evident from our discussion of the variability of SLDMs in Part I as well as from the comparative frequency of syntactic errors. In Part I it was shown, for example, that there are differences between English and German in the syntax of exemplificatory infinitive clauses; in the previous chapter it was inferred from a typical error that a verb such as suggest may enter different patterns according to whether it is used inside or outside an SLDM. The complex structure of some SLDMs may make it difficult to distil a standard entry phrase. Apart from invariable elements, any kind of phraseological unit may contain components subject to morpho-syntactic variation, so that the entry phrase should take a form which, while encompassing all possible realizations, is still universally valid. From the perspective of user convenience, this citation form should be close enough to actual occurrences of the item for the user to make the connection (see Petermann 1983). The conventions governing the wording of the citation form should be explained in the user’s guide, as they will normally depart from the dictionary norm of presenting verbs in the infinitive, German nouns in the nominative singular, etc. (see Burger 1989:595). 3 Semantic information This category includes definitions, meaning glosses and guidance on the semantic prosody of the headword. This latter type of information may be contained either in labels such as derog . for derogatory or in the definition itself; an example is provided by the definition of set in in the Cobuild English Dictionary. If something unpleasant sets in, it begins and is likely to continue to develop. (Sinclair 1995, s.v. set in) The use of the phrase ‘something unpleasant’ makes it plain that the phrasal verb set in displays an unfavourable semantic prosody. The transparency of most SLDMs means that the lexicographer can usually dispense with purely semantic definitions of these multi-word units. However, since SLDMs usually have one or more functions in text, it is indispensable to add some expository comment pertaining to these functions. As discussed in the previous section, current dictionaries either

< previous page

page_300

next page >

< previous page

page_301

next page >

Page 301 fail to provide such comment or do so only sporadically and in a rather haphazard manner. It is true, of course, that the linguistic analysis of SLDMs which forms the basis for their functional description has to take so many factors into account that it will always fall short of descriptive fullness or objectivity. Yet the kind of subjective generalizations obtained from the observation of a large corpus such as that used in Part I are quite sufficient for the compilation of dictionary entries. In defining SLDM functions, not much help can be had from traditional practices which attempt to capture the meaning of individual words in an analytic definition substitutable for the headword in question. It seems more promising to rely on folk definitions, which have become a standard feature of Cobuild dictionaries (see Hanks 1987). Folk definitions are modelled on the kind of casual explanation that competent speakers of a language tend to offer when asked about the meaning of a word or phrase. One of the most common ways of giving a folk definition is by ‘prototypic comparison’ (Mathiot 1979b), i.e. by selecting a word or phrase synonymous with the headword or phrase and then indicating the distinguishing features between the two items. Thus furious may be defined as follows: Someone who is furious is extremely angry. (Sinclair 1995, s.v. furious ) There is an implicit comparison here between the synonymous items furious and angry . In other cases, the item being explained is encoded in a typical phrase: A ray of hope, comfort, or other positive quality is a small amount of it that you welcome because it makes a bad situation seem less bad. (Sinclair 1995, s.v. ray ) A different strategy has been adopted for function words. Borrowing from speech act theory, many Cobuild definitions set out to describe what speakers do when using a particular expression. This was seen above with the exemplifier for example; the attitudinal disjunct in fact is another case in point: You use in fact, in actual fact or in point of fact to introduce or draw attention to a comment that modifies, contradicts, or contrasts with a previous statement. (Sinclair 1995, s.v. fact ) This kind of defining style can be easily adapted for the functional description of SLDMs. A few illustrations will suffice (see below for more elaborate examples):

< previous page

page_301

next page >

< previous page

page_302

next page >

Page 302 You use having said that, that said or this said to introduce or draw attention to a comment that relativizes the significance or scope of the preceding discourse. On emploie pire, pire encore, (mais) il y a pire, pis, pis encore, qui pis est et il y a pis pour baliser un passage où sera évoqué un problème, une complication ou une objection s’ajoutant à ceux qui viennent d’être évoqués. Man verwendet einschränkend muß festgestellt/gesagt/festgehalten werden, um eine Bemerkung einzuleiten, die das vorher Gesagte in seiner Tragweite begrenzt. Another indispensable feature of encoding dictionaries is guidance on semantic prosody. The error analysis carried out in the previous chapter has pointed us to a number of cases where the environment of the SLDM carries particular connotations that L2 writers may be unaware of. The informer it transpires that, for example, is employed when the writer is about to disclose information that has so far been secret or unknown to the general public, and it usually implies that this information is surprising or revealing. Guidance on this kind of semantic prosody is still conspicuous by its absence from most dictionaries (but cf. Procter 1995, s.v. transpire). 4 Contextual information This concerns the linguistic environment in which a word or phrase normally occurs, i.e. collocation and context in the widest possible sense. Typically, collocational information is given on the six traditional classes of collocation identified by Haussmann (1984, 1989; see Table 3.4). Corpus-based research (see Part I, Chapter 2) has uncovered how the concept of collocation can be usefully applied to other units as well, such as those combining two of the above types (e.g. adjective+noun+verb: have+general+applicability), preposition+adverb (well+behind), and especially to even larger units, the constituents of which may occur at Table 3.4 Hausmann’s collocational typology Type of collocation English examples 1 verb+noun (as object) to make/give/deliver a speech 2 verb+noun (as subject) an avalanche goes down 3 adjective+noun wide powers 4 noun+prep.+noun a pack of wolves 5 adverb+verb to lag badly behind 6 adverb+adjective blissfully oblivious Sources: Hausmann (1984, 1989)

< previous page

page_302

next page >

< previous page

page_303

next page >

Page 303 some considerable distance from each other. This is where collocational information on SLDMs comes in. To take a simple example, French exemplifiers co-occur significantly with prepositional phrases introduced by aυec (Siepmann 2003a), and this kind of information would need to be entered in a large monolingual encoding dictionary or a large bilingual dictionary. An example follows: Autant de «cultures» d’Asie ou d’Océanie, autant de «philosophies» dont l’Europe ne fournit qu’un exemple aυec Platon ou Kant… Beyond this, dictionaries which list SLDMs should include information on what Schemann (1989:1025) calls ‘restrictions on speech acts’. As Schemann (1989) and Ettinger (1989) have shown, lack of such information is one of the most serious weaknesses of current phraseological dictionaries. Since phraseological units such as rester sur son quant-à-soi are normally lemmatized in this infinitival citation form, the dictionary user may be misled into producing such utterances as *je suis resté sur mon quant-à-moi, although the idiom in question is only used in the third person (cf. Ettinger 1989:103). Worse still, some dictionaries rely on made-up examples that flout text-norm conventions, as in the following example from Friederich (1976): Die beiden sind durchaus nicht vom gleichen Schlag. Fritz ist wesentlich begabter. (Friederich 1976, cited in Schemann 1989:1025) Schemann (1989:1025) rightly points out that the expression υom gleichen Schlag sein is only used in affirmative statements. This is further proof that the use of a corpus is of vital importance in dictionary making, since even the native speaker cannot usually invent natural-sounding examples (see the section on exemplification, pp. 126–128). 5 Field labels Rather than incorporate necessary subject orientation into definitions, most modern dictionaries use field labels in an attempt to differentiate various meanings of a headword. Fields labels have limited applicability to SLDMs, but may be useful when combined with frequency information, as they could then indicate the relative utility of each SLDM to writers of various disciplines. Hyland’s (1998) claims on the matter are too strong: while no single SLDM is peculiar to a specific discipline, an argument can conceivably be made that some SLDMs are favoured by writers from particular academic backgrounds. 6 Style labels These are used to mark words and phrases that are not neutral in style. Again there is little relevance to SLDMs used in writing. Although some SLDMs such as this gives us carry a more colloquial flavour than others, SLDMs are generally neutral in style. 7 Geographical labels These are used to differentiate between, for

< previous page

page_303

next page >

< previous page

page_304

next page >

Page 304 example, British and American usage or German and Austrian usage. In the present state of my research I have not been able to locate any SLDMs in any of the three languages under survey that are peculiar to a particular region. Although it is well established that spoken Canadian French is more heavily influenced by American usage than European French, there is no evidence that this also applies to written academic usage. 8 Diachronic labels These usually indicate that an expression is passing out of use or has become obsolete. Needless to say, this universal linguistic process also affects SLDMs, although it is difficult to say when exactly a word or phrase is no longer current. To take a simple example, SLDMs based around the structure it+be+well+to+INF., which still enjoyed widespread currency in the first half of the twentieth century, are now being supplanted by phrases such as it is important/necessary +to+INF. or it is worth +V-ing (see Table 3.5). Obsolescent SLDMs should be marked as such in both decoding and encoding dictionaries; one may also envisage cross-references to modern-day equivalents. A few more examples of dated SLDMs will serve to illustrate such crossreferences (see Table 3.6). 9 Frequency of occurrence Recently learners’ dictionaries such as the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English have started to include information on the frequency of occurrence of the headword and its collocates. It has already been stated above that, in the case of SLDMs, such information may be particularly useful when combined with field labels. It could also be used to indicate obsolescence. 10 Cross-references Learners’ dictionaries often provide cross-references to synonyms of the headword. Such synonymic cross-referencing could be enhanced by giving e.g. up-to-date equivalents for obsolescent items. 11 Etymology Some dictionaries retrace word histories over more or less Table 3.5 Obsolescent SLDMs and their present-day equivalents Obsolescent SLDM Modern SLDM it will be well to mention it is worth mentioning it would be well to remember it should be remembered it is well to recognize that it is important to recognize that Table 3.6 Obsolescent SLDMs and their present-day equivalents Obsolescent SLDM Modern SLDM it has been well remarked that it has often been noted that a few remarks may find their place here a few remarks may be in order as will easily be seen with a little reflection a moment’s thought suggests/shows/etc. that

< previous page

page_304

next page >

< previous page

page_305

next page >

Page 305 extended periods. Such information is, however, not vital to L2 learners and translators. To sum up, the minimum requirement for SLDM coverage in dictionaries would be to furnish explicit guidance on syntactic variation, textual function and collocational patterning. Ideally, all the above types of information should be included, with the one exception that phonetic and etymological information can usually be regarded as dispensable. Learners’ dictionaries could additionally benefit from the inclusion of warnings against typical errors gleaned from corpus-based studies of learner language. Bilingual dictionaries should pay special attention to morpho-syntactic, semantic and contextual information. This is because, as noted in Part I, there are few cases of exact one-to-one correspondence between source and target-language SLDMs. 3.2.4 Exemplification Examples have long been considered an integral part of any dictionary. As Voltaire so aptly put it, ‘a dictionary without examples is a skeleton’ (‘un dictionnaire sans citations est un squelette’). All large monolingual and bilingual dictionaries contain examples in the form of illustrative phrases, sentences or, more rarely, units longer than the sentence. This section starts with a brief definition of the dictionary example before considering its form and functions. It is rounded off by a discussion of principles governing the choice of examples and of issues associated with their translation. 3.2.4.1 Definition A common definition of the dictionary example is as a ‘sentence in which the headword occurs’ (e.g. Rey-Debove 1971:261). Métrich (1993:121) rightly criticizes this kind of definition for being too narrow because it rules out language samples smaller than the sentence or utterance. It should be added that it also fails to consider higherlevel syntagms such as paragraphs. I hope to have demonstrated in Part I that the illustration of SLDM use sometimes requires exemplificatory text spans which extend beyond the boundary of the paragraph; on its own, an example sentence can give only a limited insight into the workings of an SLDM. This assessment concurs with the available literature on phraseological dictionaries, which have so far focused on idioms and proverbs rather than SLDMs. Schemann (1989:1025–1026) arrives at the conclusion that an example in a phraseological dictionary should ‘place an idiom in its entire contextual constellation, thus making tangible its semantic, pragmatic and stylistic functions in a unitary fashion’ (‘eine Situierung des Idioms in seine gesamte Kontextkonstellation, in der seine semantische,

< previous page

page_305

next page >

< previous page

page_306

next page >

Page 306 seine pragmatische und seine stilistische Funktion als Einheit anschaulich greifbar wird’). With this in mind, it seems wise to revise earlier definitions by focusing on the notion of occurrence, as Martin (1989:600) and Métrich (1993:122) suggest. The defining feature of an example, then, is that it contains an occurrence of the entry term or phrase. A primary distinction is often made between quotations and examples. Quotations are referenced citations documenting the use of a particular word or phrase by a particular writer at a particular time; especially in the French tradition of lexicography, such exemples signés are adduced to lend a particular form of words or structural pattern the authority of a renowned writer. Examples, on the other hand, have no such ‘authorizing’ role. Early work on lexicography claimed that examples, especially of the made-up type (see below), may not count as evidence in the eyes of the dictionary user (see, for example, Rey-Debove 1971:270). While this may have been a valid argument in the 1970s, it carries little weight in today’s age of computerized corpora. Quotations are by no means superior to examples, especially if the aim of the lexicographer is to represent what is standard and typical in the language (as is normally the case). On the contrary, the evanescent quality of many quotations makes them unsuitable for modern dictionaries, especially those intended for L2 learners and translators. They may à la rigueur be justified as illustrating marginal or innovative uses of the entry (‘examples in contrario’, Harras 1989:613) or as representing instances of ‘wiederholte Rede’ (Métrich 1993:123). Thus, an English dictionary might enter the saying hope springs eternal, and a German dictionary might record the phrase was die Welt im Innersten zusammenhält . Although both these expressions originated from the pens of writers who have long been dead (Pope and Goethe respectively), they still have some currency in present-day usage. But such instances of ‘wiederholte Rede’ are few and far between in the area of SLDMs. In light of the above, we may put the often-heard claim that ‘extreme banality does not need to be attested’ (Martin 1989:603) down to the distinct preference for literary quotations rather than corpus-based examples in the French lexicographic tradition. For L2 learners, who have to master ‘extreme banality’ before making their way into the higher reaches of the language, samples of common-or-garden usage are indispensable. A secondary distinction is between authentic examples, i.e. instances of recorded usage cited in its original form, and illustrative material made up by the lexicographer; by definition, a quotation is an authentic example, whereas an example stricto sensu can be either authentic or made up. It is still a moot point whether one or the other is to be preferred, but there is much to be said for choosing authentic examples. The two types of example differ with regard to their scientific status: invented examples are falsifiable, metacommunicative prototypes, while authentic examples are extracted from verifiable sources. Even if an example has been invented

< previous page

page_306

next page >

< previous page

page_307

next page >

Page 307 and checked by one or more native speakers, it may still lack some naturalness feature, as Sinclair (1988) has shown. Finally, from a purely practical point of view, it is hardly ever necessary these days to invent an example for want of evidence, as Schemann (1989:1026) still maintained at the beginning of the 1990s. This is especially true of SLDMs, which occur mainly in written or written-to-be-spoken registers, whose electronic availability is now almost limitless. Thus, examples of SLDM use should preferably be authentic; slight editing may be permissible to remove or replace words and phrases that may cause difficulty for the non-native. 3.2.4.2 Function Examples perform a number of functions. Their primary function is, of course, to illustrate syntactic, semantic and pragmatic patterns typically found in the discourse surrounding the entry word or, more simply put, to show it embedded in a natural context. In cognitive-psychological terms, the example should exhibit prototypical features of the headword or phrase (Harras 1989:611; on prototype theory, see Aitchison 1994). Métrich (1993:126) distinguishes between grammatical features on the one hand and usage features on the other. It may be objected that grammatical information is of secondary importance in the exemplificatory material: for one thing, most examples are per se illustrative of grammatical features of the headword; for another, grammatical features such as valency or declension can be easily captured in schematic form. A secondary function of examples is to balance out the tendency to abstraction inherent in definitions (Martin 1989:601), thus providing a shortcut to the meaning or function of the entry word or phrase. Ideally, the example should illustrate the core meaning or function of a phrase, enabling the user to extrapolate from it all possible uses (Schemann 1989:1026). In the case of SLDMs this secondary function of examples should not be underestimated, especially given the difficulty of achieving a high degree of conceptual precision in describing pragmatic uses. Naturally, lexicographers have to beware of making up examples to achieve a perfect fit with their definitions or disregarding authentic examples which fail to meet pre-established defining features. The defining function of examples can be enhanced by juxtaposing synonyms and antonyms that are mutually illuminating (Martin 1989:601; Harras 1989:612). Thus, a dictionary including SLDMs might juxtapose retrospective labels of the type à cet effet and à cette fin. It should also provide cross-references between functionally related items such as ceci dit and cela exposé. Third, examples may serve what Martin calls an ‘epilinguistic’ function (Martin 1989:604; cf. also Harras 1989:613), where the language sample itself contains a definition of the headword or phrase and/or metacommunicative information on its usage. For obvious reasons, however, this

< previous page

page_307

next page >

< previous page

page_308

next page >

Page 308 will rarely be the case with SLDMs, although occasional instances may be spotted, as seen in the following: Mais les records de purisme sont battus par l’islandais dont le plus simple est de dire qu’il refuse carrément les emprunts et la néologie moderne, en sorte que téléphone se dit talsimi (le fil qui parle), hôtel, gistihus (maison/qui reçoit/des invités), taxi, leigubill (voiture de louage), électricité, rafmagn (force/qui court dans/l’ambre!), etc… Cela dit. qui était une première approche, les langues scandinaves sont des langues germaniques, bien indoeuropéennes, à ce titre. Elles représentent la branche septentrionale du germanique, lequel, comme on le sait, s’est ramifié Lastly, traditional lexicography stated as policy that examples should be instructive, entertaining and witty. This is a tradition that may well be revived in the case of SLDMs by extracting language samples from the most intriguing sources. Preferably, such sources should be popular-scientific rather than scientific to allow academics from various backgrounds to accede to a full understanding of each SLDM. It must be borne in mind, however, that not all uses of SLDMs can be located in popular-science or newspaper texts. A word in conclusion about the allocation of examples to entries. Since in traditional paper dictionaries the use of space is of paramount importance, dictionary compilers may not be able to provide an illustrative example for every entry or sub-entry. In the case of learners’ dictionaries this has given rise to random and unsystematic exemplification practices (Stein 1999). In the case of SLDMs illustrations are vital; it is better to miss out an SLDM entirely rather than entering it without exemplification and thus potentially leading dictionary users astray. Since the sometimes numerous pragmatic functions of discourse markers cannot easily be illustrated within the limited compass of a paper dictionary, the ideal place for them is the electronic dictionary, which, apart from being cheaper to produce and update, offers easier and faster access. 3.3 Sample entries This section presents a number of sample entries as they might appear in different types of dictionaries. The lexicographic treatment proposed here is grounded, on the one hand, in the description of SLDMs undertaken in Part I and, on the other, in the general lexicographic principles discussed in the preceding pages. As a rule, then, the sample entries are meant to speak for themselves, although some comment will be attached on the objectives of each type of word-book envisaged and on the consequences this has for depth of coverage.

< previous page

page_308

next page >

< previous page

page_309

next page >

Page 309 The technical side of electronic dictionaries is beyond the scope of this study (for an overview, see Heid 1997), as are questions of typographical presentation. 3.3.1 Sample entries in a conceptually arranged vocabulary book Conceptually arranged vocabulary books such as McArthur (1981) are many and varied (on the rationale behind such books, see Siepmann 2001b). This section concentrates on the presentation of SLDMs in three textbooks-cumdictionaries specifically devoted to the functional vocabulary of English, French and German (Gallagher et al., in preparation; Gallagher and Siepmann, in preparation). The term ‘functional’ is here taken to refer to linking words as well as general abstract nouns, verbs and adjectives. The main concern in these books is to help L2 learners carve out a fluent and authentic academic writing style; accordingly, the aim is for maximum breadth and depth of coverage, with a view to meeting the decoding and encoding needs of advanced learners, including the need to translate discourse markers. The authors start from the assumption that the totality of rhetorical relations can be expressed by means of a comparatively small range of discourse devices that are assigned to functional categories. Each of these categories is given detailed treatment in a separate chapter. I have here singled out as an example the treatment of English comparison and contrast markers. Comparison markers: sample entry Since the content of each functional category is arranged by part of speech, the comparison markers in question appear under various headings such as ‘conjunctions’, ‘attached statements and discourse devices’ and ‘sentence connectors’. Each comparison marker can thus be accessed either via the alphabetical index or via the chapter devoted to the functional category it comes under and the part of speech it belongs to. Note that the names given to parts of speech serve a pedagogic purpose and may not be fully congruent with current linguistic categorization. Most of the language material is presented in the form of three-column tables. The left-hand column, written in English, contains formalized patterns which include typical collocations (e.g. quite/exactly the opposite), functional definitions and general remarks on the use of the entry word or phrase. A number of well-known abbreviations and labels, such as NP for ‘noun phrase’ and obsolesc. for ‘obsolescent’ are used; there are also cross-references both to the same chapter (e.g. see 2A above) and to other chapters (e.g.→Concession). The central column provides examples in which the entry words or phrases are underlined, so that learners can make the connection with the formalized patterns, identify typical

< previous page

page_309

next page >

< previous page

page_310

next page >

Page 310 contexts and use the exemplificatory material as a model for their own writing. The examples are fully authentic, since at this stage in language learning there should be no need for editing out ‘difficult’ words whose meaning can usually be inferred from context. Note the pioneering use of broken underlines to illustrate the presence of longdistance lexical dependencies in cases where the relevant patterns admit a great degree of variation: Volkswagen, which now owns 70 per cent of the Czech company, would have thought the Skoda’s identity problematic. Not so. VW sees Skoda as one of the most recognized brand names in advertising. In the right-hand column there are translations of individual words or entire example sentences, and in some cases there are also explanations in German. This arrangement allows learners to adapt the material to suit their own needs and preferences. For reasons of space, only a small section of the entire entry can be reproduced here (see Table 3.7). 3.3.2 Sample entries in monolingual paper and electronic dictionaries The sample entries below show how SLDMs may be treated in a large learners’ dictionary of English such as the Collins Cobuild English Dictionary (Sinclair 1995). Systematic account has been taken of the dictionary features pioneered by Cobuild, such as folk definitions and unedited examples from authentic text (see Sinclair 1987). Space considerations would probably preclude more detailed coverage in this type of dictionary; they also make it necessary to state the definition at the highest possible degree of generality, without any further sense divisions. One small problem facing learner lexicography is that SLDMs usually require more than sentence-length exemplification (see Section 3.2) and that the occurrence of the headword or phrase may not be so easy to spot within the exemplificatory text. One way of remedying this problem would be to introduce underlines, as in the sample entries shown in Tables 3.8 to 3.10. Prototypic comparison (see Section 3.2.3) may sometimes play a role in the defining process. Comparison may be made between first-level and second-level markers, or between second-level markers with partially overlapping or similar functions (see Table 3.11). The SLDM use of or in Table 3.11, though common, is still conspicuous by its absence from the current edition of the Cobuild dictionary. Next let us take a look at electronic dictionaries. The greatest advantage of these is that space considerations are of no importance whatsoever. A CD-ROM can store up to 700 megabytes of information, with the result that even the largest of current dictionaries—the OED—easily fits onto a

< previous page

page_310

next page >

< previous page

page_311

next page >

Page 311 Table 3.7 A sample entry in a dictionary of marker words Group 2: Conjunctions A. (just/much) as/in the same way that+CLAUSE+ (1) In the same way that cars need So wie mehr (so)+CLAUSE: this pattern is used to say that two people or fuel to help them move, we need Bücher als je things are equal in terms of or things are equal in terms of fuel to keep our bodies going. zuvor ‘basis of comparison’, or ‘tertium comparationis’, cf. example 1) geschrieben they possess, or that the situation in the second clause (2) As the city grows in size, so the werden, so wird depends in some way on the situation in the first clause and number of citizens is likely to grow at such mehr takes place at the same time (cf. example 2). In this kind of an ever increasing rate. über sie construction, the main clause, introduced by so, so too, so also, geschrieben. likewise or in the same manner, is usually placed after the Just as more books are written than subclause. ever before, so they are more written about. Much as humans have hunches, favouring some new ideas over others, so does this program. As food is taken into the gut, so In gleichem there is a controlled sequence by Maße wie…, which food is passed towards the so… anus. As Liberty and Tyranny have no common meeting place, so protestantism and popery cannot be reconciled. (…) Just as an English lady will nearly always write in a manner that in any other country would only be found in a man’s hand, in the same manner the whole language is more manly than any other language I know. The word order in the main clause is usually inverted if the Just as Emilia is the most So wie Emilia writer wishes to avoid using the same form of words in the sympathetic character in Othello, so die second half of the sentence (‘ellipsis’). is Horatio in Hamlet and the Nurse in mitfühlendste Romeo and Juliet. (= Just as Emilia Figur in Othello is the most sympathetic character in ist, so nehmen Othello, so Horatio is the most Horatio und die sympathetic character in Hamlet…) Schwester Butjust as supermarkets had a mixed diese Rolle in year, so too did newspapers. Hamlet bzw. Romeo und Julia ein.

< previous page

page_311

next page >

< previous page

page_312

next page >

Page 312

Group 2: Conjunctions B. just as much as is used to say that the situation in the first clause is true to (1) He reiterates a position so wie, the same degree or extent as the situation in the second clause. It is thus which, in fact, Marx and in sometimes equivalent to the equative pattern (just) as /while/in the same Engels held and which gleichem way that+ clause+(so)+clause (cf. examples 1, 2) or as+ADJ+ every enlightened Marxist Maße as+clause. At other times it is used to highlight a disparity or divergence ratherhas also held, that is, that wie than making a mere comparison (cf. e.g. examples 2 and 3); in this sense the superstructure influences pattern is not merely equative but also concessive (see the chapter on base just as much as base concession). The same function can be performed by the patterns influences superstructure. PREDICATIVE ADJ+as+VP+ NP and (as+) PREDICATIVE (=Just as superstructure ADJ+as+NP+FINITE MODAL+INF (cf. examples 4, 5a, 5b, 6). The influences base, so base concessive nature of this pattern is often reinforced by the use of adversative influences superstructure, conjunctions ( nevertheless, 5a) or comparatives ( far more difficult, 5b). Other see 2A above). patterns able to express the (2) At my second visit Paris so was as brilliant as it had sehr…so been unsightly at my first. sehr (3) In wide historical terms, the Middle Kingdom separated minds just as much as it facilitated communication. (4) And small as is the so mass of accumulated klein…so knowledge in proportion to klein the vastness of the theme, how pitifully small is the selection from that mass which I have been able to set down in 200,000 words dealing with six whole centuries of the variegated and wonderful life of England. (5a) Harsh and disturbing as the Athenians may be at times, they nevertheless do have a positive, if rather bleak, project. (5b) As difficult as it may be to absorb such a concept, it is far more difficult to view a truthmaking relationship the ‘other way round’. (6) Trivial as the story is, its idyllic charm is ingratiating. (7) If it is surprising that so many documents exist of colonial literature, it is equally surprising that Evans tries to wade through them all. (8) Even though each magician will quickly perish, it will just as quickly be re-created by its co-conspirators. (9) While the prosecution of the war itself calls for a high degree of mobility of labour and capital, so does the need to adjust to the very different economic situation which emerges after the war. (10) Much as they differ on parts of the picture and other

< previous page

page_312

next page >

< previous page

page_313

next page >

Page 313 same kind of relationship are illustrated in examples issues, there is a shared belief across this spectrum that 7–11. Note that much as can be both fully history changed course dramatically when Kennedy was equative and fully concessive (for an example of assassinated in November 1963, an event that casts a equative much as, see 2A above). grim shadow over all that followed. (11) As much as many of us might like to repudiate myth and archetype, it seems unlikely to me that humans can do without them. (→ CONCESSION) C. not…any more than: This pattern involves a Not all women are ‘carers’ any more than all women are negative clause followed by a clause introduced by ‘victims’ or ‘contractors’. It should not persuade us that this writer has yielded or any more than. Unlike the patterns discussed above, it is used to say that the situation in the first sold out, any more than it should persuade us that the boy poet Klima is in every sense the boy poet Jaromil. clause is equally untrue or undesirable as that in According to Freud, one cannot disown these evil the second clause. impulses any more than one can disown the id from which they originate. Theiaitetos sleeping is not quite the same as Theiaitetos waking, any more than Alcibiades drunk is Alcibiades sober. Goup 3: Attached statements and related discourse devices A. […] B. […] C. The pattern the same goes for is used to say Strictly speaking, what we hear is not a coach in which gleiches that what has been stated about one person or we might travel, but its noise. The same goes for the gilt für thing is also true of another one. This pattern has a coach we see. wide range of variants which can be assigned to six Taking one step, then two steps, then four steps, and so categories: on, builds both physical capacity and belief. The same is true of learning to overcome phobias. It is true that once a useful co-ordinating convention is established every person has reason to adhere to it, a reason

< previous page

page_313

next page >

< previous page

page_314

next page >

Page 314

Group 3: Attached statemmts and related discourse devices 1the same (thing) is true ofwhich is independent of the existence of the authority, a reason deriving entirely (or: for; with)/holds true from the existence of the useful convention. The same is true where there is a good for/applies to (or: prospect that such a convention will emerge. with)/can be said for/is Since the military court was not ‘part of the judicial power of the country’ under the case with+NP Article III of the U.S. Constitution, its verdict was judged invalid. If the same legal 2the same is true/applies/ reasoning applies to the ICC, any ICC judgment against an American who committed is applicable an offense in the United States will likely be judged unconstitutional because the ICC where+clause is clearly not an Article III court of the United States. 3it (or: the Working women, especially if they have children, may not have time for community situation/problem, etc.) is activities. Likewise working men. Feudal privileges should not be hereditary; they the same with (respect exist by consent of the state, and should be terminable at the state’s convenience. to)/for+NP Likewise with ecclesiastical property: it exists through permission and protection by 4the same (kind of) the state, and may be nationalized when the nation’s need and will so decree. considerations/reasoning/ remarks apply (applies) to +NP 5the same issue/problem (etc.) arises with respect to+NP 6Likewise (with)+NP D. The following patterns are The more green eggs that are produced, the lower the price they sell for, and similar to the above, except similarly with ham. In India, a strong Forest Conservation Act (1980) large that they do not express afforestation programs implemented since 1980, and conversion of forests to sameness but similarity: protected areas have contributed to no net significant emissions from the forest 1similarly for (or: with/in sector. Similarly in China, since the period of 1977–1981, forested areas are etc.)+NP increasing because of large reforestation programs. …the power of the laity in church 2a similar statement// decision-making, including statements on political ethics and positions on similar remarks/ considerations hold(s)

< previous page

page_314

next page >

< previous page

page_315

next page >

Page 315 for+NP public local issues, is quite considerable. A similar statement can be made of the 3a similar statement presbyterian community, which is almost wholly Northern, and whose main Southern can/ may be made presbytery is in the counties of old Ulster which remain in the Republic—Donegal, Cavan, of/about+NP and Monaghan. The tensions and ambiguities ‘of action, knowledge, and meaning’ lived 4something similar by Oedipus are thus reflected in the formal structure and language of the play. happens with (or: Something similar happens in a Socratic dialogue. in)/is true of +NP E. The following patterns The exact purpose of Bristol’s earliest Atlantic explorations remains uncertain, but the are used to say that what same cannot be said of the projects of John Cabot. has just been stated about Matthew Arnold, like his father before him, was strongly opposed to slavery; the same one person or thing is not could not be said of Thomas necessarily true of another one: 1The same Carlyle. cannot/could not be In a market economy, investments in physical capital that can be expected to yield more said of/for/ about+NP than the normal market return will always be made. The same is not true for investments 2The same is not the in human capital. They will be made only if the human in question (or his parents or case for/is not true someone else who values his future welfare or trusts him to pay back loans) can provide for (or: of, with)+NP the necessary capital. 3It/the situation/the For white South Africans, rugby is as much an obsession as it is for New Zealanders. It is position/the different with blacks. Outside the Eastern Cape Province, most black South Africans do picture/the case (etc.) not give a fig for rugby… is different/ otherwise Helena Christensen, Paula Yates and Amanda de Cadenet are among the scores of (obsolesc.) with/ females who have had the hots for him. But Noel is different. He’s a bit older. He knows in+NP; NP is different the score. 4Not so (with) NP We expect genuine science to tell us how the world is. 5it is a different/another story/matter with/for/ in+NP 6It is a different story/ matter when/if+CLAUSE;

< previous page

page_315

next page >

< previous page

page_316

next page >

Page 316

Group 3: Attached statements and related discourse deυices it/the case (etc.) is different/ We do not care what language it uses, so long as it gets the facts right, so long otherwise (obsolesc.) when/ as its theories and claims are constrained by a world which is independent of if+CLAUSE thought, language, or any system of representing it. In an intensional language 7NP is (quite/entirely/ things are quite otherwise. altogether) another/a (very) Volkswagen, which now owns 70 per cent of the Czech different matter; another/a company, would have thought the Skoda’s identity problematic. Not so. VW sees (very) different story; a (very) Skoda as one of the most recognized brand names in advertising. Sir Bernard different/another kettle of fish Lovell came to lecture at Bristol Cathedral in the late 1970s. He spoke of black (coll.) (entirely /altogether) holes, of quarks and gluons and most of us were quite out of our depth. Not so 8The same considerations/ the Bristol Cathedral School sixth-form physics set. conclusion(s)/remark(s) do An autobiography seeks to tell all from beginning to end and displays a definite not hold for/are not valid chronological development. Not so with the memoir. for+NP First and foremost there is the unique positive achievement of the war. The war has achieved, as never before, the technical unity of the world. The spirit of unity is quite a different matter. F. The following patterns are used Happé (1994) has shown that normal children who make mistakes on the block to say that what has just been design task of the Wechsler scalest end to violate the pattern details but not the stated about one person or thing is overall configuration; the reverse is the case for children with autism. the opposite of what is true of Art is rooted ultimately in socially constructed systems of taste, and the another person or thing: converse is also true: lack of ‘good taste’ is

< previous page

page_316

next page >

< previous page

page_317

next page >

Page 317 1(exactly/quite/just) the constructed through artistic expression, although it may not be recognized as such by reverse/opposite//the arbiters of high culture. converse is (also) true This idea—that longer activity spans would be followed by longer sleeps and vice (of/for/with+NP)/the versa—does not find experimental support. The reverse is seen: long ‘daytimes’ tend case (for+NP) to be followed by shorter sleeps and vice versa. 2the reverse is seen If meter were a normative prosody, one would expect that the strongest meters would (with+ NP); the opposite occur in response to the most continuous and rigidly repetitive phrasings, but just the is said (of+NP) opposite is the case. In forms such as rap, where meter is very strong, the linguistic prosody is often wildly discontinuous, flexible, and non-repetitive, running in high syncopation to the meter.

< previous page

page_317

next page >

< previous page

page_318

next page >

Page 318 Table 3.8 A sample entry for ‘with this in mind’ in Cobuild style mind/maind/minds […] 19 You use with this in mind to move from one part of a text to another. The first part usually PHR with cl provides the background to what you are about to say in the next part. Obυiously, errors alone don’t constitute sublime writing for Longinus. His point, rather, is that error-free writing is more often the =against product of petty rather than sublime aspirations. With this in mind, it becomes possible to argue that the this magnitude of Freud’s error is perhaps eυidence of the sublime quality of his writing… background; that said; on this basis Table 3.9 A sample entry for ‘not so’ in Cobuild style so/sou/ […] 12 You can use not so to say that what you have just stated is untrue although it may have seemed PHR as probable at first sight. This use is particularly common in written English. Some might think Volkswagen, sentence which now owns 70per cent of the Czech company, would have thought the Skoda’s identity problematic. Not so. VW sees Skoda as one of the most recognized brand names in adυertising.

< previous page

page_318

next page >

< previous page

page_319

next page >

Page 319 Table 3.10 A sample entry for ‘any more than’ in Cobuild style any/eni/[…] 8 You can use any more than to introduce a clause which follows a negative clause, thereby stressing CONJthat the situation in the first clause is equally (un) true or (un)desirable as that in the second clause…. COORD Washington is not Little Rock, any more than it was Plains, Georgia… Table 3.11 A sample entry for ‘or’ in Cobuild style or […] 3 You can use or to restate what you have just said in other words; this is similar to using that is, with CONJthe difference that or normally introduces a translation, a (unit of) measurement or a less technical form of COORD words than the one which goes before. Satyagraha, or ‘Truth Force,’ was before all else a way to win over the ‘enemy’ and make him a friend…light-emitting polymers (LEPs), or plastics… Only 11, or 18 % of the = that is; doctors knew the answer…on average, 19%, or 19 cents on the dollar. in other words; literally; also called

< previous page

page_319

next page >

< previous page

page_320

next page >

Page 320 single CD-ROM. DVDs offer more than twenty times that amount of storage space, so that future dictionaries will be able to incorporate huge corpora and audio samples of spoken language. An added advantage is the possibility of hypertextual navigation. Hypertext links between entries and sub-entries enable the compiler to grant users the best of both worlds: alphabetic and conceptual arrangement. Alternatively, alphabetic listing may be dispensed with altogether, with the result that the user can carry out searches on the entire text of the dictionary. There is also enough space for the compiler to discuss collocations and long-distance lexical dependencies and to provide relevant hyperlinks. In this way the entry for the restrictor with this in mind, to take but one example, could be linked with the entries for the transition markers with which it typically co-occurs; in the sample entry shown in Table 3.12 possible hypertext links have been highlighted. Table 3.13 presents an alternative and more exhaustive way of covering SLDMs in a large electronic dictionary which need not necessarily be arranged by the alphabet. 3.3.3 Treatment of SLDMs in bilingual paper and electronic dictionaries The following sample entry (p. 323) is intended for an unabridged French-German dictionary. It illustrates some of the most frequent uses of the headword exemple within exemplifiers. Particular attention has been paid to translation problems commonly encountered, such as: • the use of the demonstrative pronoun celui in French and the omission of such a pronoun in German; • the relational use of donner in French, which constitutes a collocational gap (see Siepmann 2002b); • the use of the pronouns en and dafür or hierfür, which can be substituted for noun phrases; • the habitual omission of the definite article in front of bestes Beispiel or folgendes Beispiel . All the French examples are authentic; their translations have been ‘authenticated’ with the help of academic and newspaper corpora. In accordance with lexicographic policy on examples in bilingual paper dictionaries, short examples have been preferred over long ones wherever possible. As I have argued elsewhere in this study, it is, however, necessary to go beyond sentence-length examples in order to illustrate some types or uses of SLDMs. The rendition of such extended citations into the target language will place great demands on the translatorial competence of future generations of lexicographers:

< previous page

page_320

next page >

< previous page

page_321

next page >

Page 321 Table 3.12 A sample entry for ‘with this in mind’ in a Cobuild-style electronic dictionary mind/maind/minds […] 19 You use with this in mind to move from one part of a text to another. The first part usually PHR with cl provides the background to what you are about to say in the next part. Obυiously, errors alone don’t constitute sublime writing for Longinus. His point, rather, is that errovfree writing is more often the =against product of petty rather than sublime aspirations. With this in mind, it becomes possible to argue that this the magnitude of Freud’s error is perhaps eυidence of the sublime quality of his writing… background; More specifically, you can use with this in mind in three slightly different modes: that said; 19.1 You can use with this in mind to introduce a topic shift while at the same time reminding your on this readers that they must remember the background information you have just provided. In this mode, basis you can combine with this in mind with such transitional devices as let us turn to, let us revisit, I now come to, etc. If the subject matter exists, it must be true. Therefore, eυery utterance is true since it *names* its subject matter. The relation between these two problems should be eυident. If we can resolυe how it is possible to speak of negated or non-existent referents, then problem of falsehood should become manageable. With this in mind, let us turn to Pelletier’s and Denyer’s treatment of the problems. 19.2 You can use with this in mind to refer back to a restriction which readers have to remember in order to form a proper understanding of what you are about to say. Direct comparisons holding entrydate and/or age of immigrants are inappropriate because the female immigrant’s husband is, on aυerage, seυeral years older than the male immigrant. With this in mind, the comparisons do not indicate any major difference. 19.3 You can use with this in mind to draw a conclusion from what you have just said. In this case, what you have just said provides the basis for what you are about to say. In this mode, you can combine with this in mind with such phrases as we can understand or I venture to suggest. Data on language is considered one of the strongest indicators for determining just how traditional or modern a tribe might be. With this in mind, we will note, for example, that the Naυajos are probably the most traditional tribe of all, followed by the Pimas.

< previous page

page_321

next page >

< previous page

page_322

next page >

Page 322 Table 3.13 A sample entry for the SLDM ‘es ist anzumerken’ in a large electronic dictionary es ist anzumerken FUNKTION einen erklärenden, häufig kritischen Zusatz zu einem υorhergehenden Teiltext machen KONTEXT meist in wissenschaftlichen Texten, selten in Zeitungstexten STRUKTUR UND zu etw./bei etw.//hierzu/dazu/hierbei ist/bleibt (kritisch/negativ//positiv// generell/ KOLLOKATORENüberhaupt…//noch/ferner/außerdem) anzumerken, daß… Es ist (kritisch/noch/ferner/negativ…) (zu etw.) anzumerken, daß… (Kritisch/Negativ//Positiv//Generell/Überhaupt…//allerdings/jedoch…//ferner/…) ist (zu etw.) (jedoch/indes//noch/ferner/außerdem/…) anzumerken, daß…(kritisch/negativ//positiv…) anzumerken ist (jedoch/indes//ferner/außerdem/…), daß… (hier[zu]/dazu/an dieser Stelle…) ist/wäre (einiges/folgendes/etliches…) anzumerken 1BEISPIEL In der hier gewählten Perspektive erwiesen sich Demarkations- und Differenzierungsprozesse als untrennbar aufeinander bezogen; ihr Wechselspiel zeigte sich als wesentlich fur die Ausgestaltung schizophrener Phänomene, wobei ein erweiterter Kongnitionsbegriff sich als sinnvoll erwiesen hat, um neurophysiologische und psychische Prozesse gemeinsam zu erfassen, ohne zu reduktionistischen Lösungen zu gelangen. Allerdings ist hierzu kritisch anzumerken, daß der weit gefaßte Kognititonsbegriff MATURANAs nicht nur Vorteile bietet. (psychologischer Fachtext) […]

< previous page

page_322

next page >

< previous page

page_323

next page >

Page 323 Le gamay constitue à lui seul les trois quarts de l’encépagement rouge. Ses vins sont à consommer très jeunes. ~/un~: le Cru Chautagne. Der Gamay macht allein schon drei Viertel des roten Sortenbestandes aus. Die aus dieser Rebsorte gewonnenen Weine werden sehr jung getrunken. (Ein) Beispiel: der Cru Chautagne. Grâce à la mise au point de matériaux bien tolérés par l’organisme, les prothèses osseuses ou articulaires se multiplient: prothèse totale de l’articulation de la hanche, prothèse totale du genou pour citer deux ~s. Durch die Entwicklung biologisch gut verträglicher Materialien entsteht eine immer größere Vielfalt von Knochen- oder Gelenkprothesen wie die vollständige Hüftgelenksprothese und die vollständige Knieprothese, um nur zwei Beispiele zu nennen. Un~permet de mesurer la différence des deux sortes de texte. Ein Beispiel soll die Unterschiedlichkeit der beiden Texttypen veranschaulichen. Un autre~est celui des «rave-parties». Ein weiteres Beispiel sind die sogenannten ‘Raves’. On en a un~dans le quotidien Libération. Ein Beispiel dafür/hierfür bietet/liefert die Tageszeitung ‘Libération’. L’Arabie Saoudite est/donne/fournit/offre un~d’Etat islamique moderne. Saudi-Arabien ist/liefert/bietet ein Beispiel für einen modernen islamischen Staat. Le meilleur~de ce type de serveur de prépublications est celui animé par Paul Ginsparg dans le domaine de la ). Bestes Beispiel für diese Art von Prepublication-Server ist der Physik-Site von Paul physique ( ). Ginsparg ( …, comme en atteste/en témoigne/en fait foi/le montre l’~suivant; comme on le voit par l’~suivant…, wie folgendes Beispiel zeigt/belegt; wie an folgendem Beispiel abzulesen/zu erkennen/zu sehen ist Such entries may well be extended in electronic dictionaries by adding more material, by hyperlinking illustrative examples to a database containing larger spans of the discourse surrounding the example and by providing additional hyperlinks between the French-German and the German-French parts of the dictionary. To give dictionary users easier access to the kind of information discussed here, it is desirable to further develop electronic databases such as

< previous page

page_323

next page >

< previous page

page_324

next page >

Page 324 that described in Fontenelle (1997), who extracted 70,000 collocations from a large bilingual dictionary and categorized them according to an extended set of lexical functions based on Mel’čuk’s Meaning-Text Theory (Mel’čuk 1981). His database allows users to access collocations not only via the collocate, but also through a number of other paths. For example, the user can make a query about nouns denoting a ‘single unit’ of a node such as enthusiasm, and will be told that the words spurt and burst fill the bill. The same sort of organizing principle could be applied to broad functional categories such as exemplification and restriction. For instance, a user query concerning exemplification should yield, among other things, exemplificatory infinitive clauses such as pour citer deux exemples or copular clauses such as Un autre exemple est celui de+NP.

< previous page

page_324

next page >

< previous page

page_325

next page >

Page 325 4 Avenues for further research Research into multi-word markers is still in its infancy, and it is my hope that this book will be used as a springboard for future investigations. In this final section I briefly discuss several lines of inquiry which may be fruitfully explored. First, and most obviously, future work should undertake a close analysis of those categories of markers which were not given detailed attention in this study and in Siepmann (2001a). Some categories in particular will repay further research; foremost among these is the category of suggestors, whose members number in their thousands (Siepmann, forthcoming). In analysing other types of markers future studies could aim either for greater breadth or for greater depth of coverage. Of particular interest to the further development of linguistic theory and composition practice are collocations, especially ‘long-distance’ collocations, between second-level markers. Second, the present research may be extended to other languages. Due to its growing role as a second ‘world language’, Spanish would seem to be the prime candidate for such research, especially since there is a prolific academic community writing in Spanish. It would also be interesting to conduct contrastive studies comparing marker use in European and Asian languages, and to pursue further the question of ‘marker density’ across languages. Third, ‘oral’ second-level discourse markers deserve further study. It is a fair guess that the spoken language contains thousands of hitherto ‘undiscovered’ second-level markers, which play an important role in establishing idiomaticity (cf. Bidaud 2002; Martins-Baltar 2000). To take a few French examples, plusieurs choses may be used to announce a list of arguments, je ne dis pas ça méchamment is commonly employed to soften the impact of a statement that might otherwise appear insulting, and affaire classée signals that a matter is considered to have been settled for good. This brings us to a fourth point: language teaching specialists could further investigate the role and nature of second-level marker use in non-native speech and writing; they could also study methods for teaching such markers or the role they play in learning to write; psycholinguists

< previous page

page_325

next page >

< previous page

page_326

next page >

Page 326 could conduct empirical research into the representation of second-level markers in the mental lexicon. Fifth, the differences and similarities between first-level and second-level markers await further investigation. As seen at various points in this study, there is much common ground between some first-level and second-level markers, but wide divergence between others. Another avenue for further research concerns the relationship between rhetorical relations and discourse markers. This study has suggested that current models of rhetorical relations may not be fully adequate to account for the functions of second-level markers.

< previous page

page_326

next page >

< previous page

page_327

next page >

Page 327 Notes PART I 1 Observing languages: introduction to Part I 1 Hausmann (1984) calls these ‘Ko-Kreationen’ and rightly distinguishes them from collocations. ‘Ko-Kreationen’, he argues, pose no major problems for the learner. 2 For a discussion of the inventories and corpora involved, see Section 1.2. 3 Indeed, some discourse markers defy simplistic categorization. It is only qualitative translatogical research that can account for the fuzzy boundaries between functions. 4 For instance, Wilss (1996:79–80) rejects the use of the term ‘contrastive linguistics’ for the kind of comparison I propose to undertake in Chapter 4, distinguishing between ‘directional’ contrastive linguistics and translatology on the one hand, and ‘non-directional’ cross-language comparison (‘Sprachvergleich’, ‘Sprachkomparatistik’) on the other. For all practical purposes, such a distinction seems otiose. There is no reason why non-directional analyses should not come within the scope of contrastive linguistics. Equally unjustified is Wilss’s (1996:81) claim that contrastive and translation studies are concerned with structural symmetry rather than asymmetry. Indeed, the whole point of such sub-disciplines of contrastive linguistics as contrastive lexicology is to ferret out both ‘literal’ and ‘free’ equivalences. 5 Cf. also the cognitive-linguistic view of language as a ‘massive collection of heterogeneous constructions, each with affinities to different contexts and in constant structural adaptation to usage’ (Bybee and Hopper 2001:3, with reference to Langacker 1987). 6 Most especially as far as written text is concerned, where such performance features as intonation, hesitation, false starts, etc. play no role. 7 An alternative, stylistically less satisfying rendering may be based on the noun+participle collocation lost time. this will help you avoid lost time (+-ing-clause/ from +noun phrase). 8 For further discussion of such matters, cf. Siepmann (2004). 9 Cf. Schmidt (1996) for further information on the rationale behind a non-directional approach (‘adirektional’ in her German terminology). 10 Some corpora can even be searched online (e.g. the British National Corpus and a 50-million word segment of the Bank of English). 11 For magisterial overviews of the field, see Kennedy (1998), Habert et al. (1997) and McEnery and Wilson (1996). 12 The corpus was developed under EU-funded Lingua project ndeg.93–09/1245/F-VB. The project description is mounted on the website of the University of Birmingham, situated at the following address at the time of going to press: http://web.bham.ac.uk/johnstf/lingua.htm

< previous page

page_327

next page >

< previous page

page_328

next page >

Page 328 13 Unfortunately, I rarely noted down sources at the time, so that some of the material will have to be taken on trust by the reader. In recent years a number of books containing similar material have appeared which can now usefully augment the inventory (cf. Part II, Chapter 3). A spin-off from this work will be a guide to composition (Gallagher et al., in preparation), for which the present research provides the theoretical basis. 14 Available on the Internet at the following address: www.tu-chemnitz.de/ phil/InternetGrammar 2 Investigating routines: defining and describing multi-word discourse markers 1 The preliminary distinctions made (not the terminology used) here are based on Becker (1975) and Sinhaneti (1982). Nattinger and DeCarrico’s (1992) work on the related but broader field of ‘lexical phrases’ adopts Becker’s classification uncritically, as does Crystal (1995). 2 Note that even when used with this ‘literal’ meaning alone, the word takes on a pragmatic function in a piece of text. 3 He also overlooks that there may well be an intermediate level between counter-creations on the one hand and co-creations or collocations on the other, as the following attested examples show: androgynously dressed (cocreation/free combination)—scantily dressed (collocation)— economically dressed (borderline case between collocation and counter-creation)—nudely dressed (counter-creation). 4 For a more detailed rejection of semantic approaches to collocation, see Siepmann (2002b). Tersely stated, I would argue in favour of a frequency-based approach to collocation which limits itself to ‘holistic’ word combinations (thus excluding such combinations as hotel at and of the hotel, which can be found in Kjellmer 1994). 5 Gallagher (1986, 1989a, 1989b) has given an interesting translatological account of these items, which may be enhanced within a more general framework of interlingual divergence (see Siepmann 2001a). 4 Straddling cultures: three types of second-level discourse markers in contrastive perspective 1 For further detail on restrictors and suggestors, see Siepmann (2001a) and Siepmann (forthcoming). 2 In most of these studies, however, such frequency counts are not laid open to inspection. 3 Hutz is not totally unaware of this: ‘Durch andere Kohäsionsverfahren wie beispielsweise lexikalische Rekurrenz, Pro-Formen oder andere Verfahren der lexikalischen Kohäsion kann der geringe Einsatz von Textkonnektoren durchaus kompensiert werden’ (Hutz 1997:177; my emphasis), but does not follow this argument through to its logical conclusion. 4 And writing that uses metadiscourse may be easier to produce because it contains more routine elements. The novice writer, especially the non-native, may therefore be well advised to use metadiscourse liberally in order to lighten his learning burden. 5 Note that it is not the main purpose of the investigation to answer these research questions (see Chapter 1). 6 For example, par exemple and zum Beispiel have also been taken account of here.

< previous page

page_328

next page >

< previous page

page_329

next page >

Page 329 PART II 1 Introduction 1 ‘Many university students do not progress beyond the school-leaving level because they have not realized that vocabulary acquisition requires patience, hard work, perseverance and a bee-like assiduity… But what more could life have to offer than the pleasure of flying from flower to flower, collecting the nectar of vocabulary and occasionally stinging those who try to get in the way?’ (my translation) 2 Facing realities: the performance of non-native writers and translators 1 For a constantly updated bibliography, see http://www.fltr.ucl.ac.be/FLTR/ GERM/ETAN/CECL/publications.html 2 In order to preserve the anonymity of the authors of defective texts, general occupational titles such as ‘linguist’ or ‘language teaching specialist’ are used in place of actual names in the remainder of this chapter. 3 Lexicographic treatment of SLDMs 1 Since it is not yet available on CD-ROM, the ten-volume Duden, which is extremely difficult to search, is not included in the investigation. 2 A comprehensive list of items found in the vocabulary books cited here can be found on my website: www.dirksiepmann.de

< previous page

page_329

next page >

< previous page

page_330

next page >

Page 330 Bibliography Abraham, W. (1975) ‘Deutsch aber, sondern, dafür und ihre Äquivalente im Niederländischen und Englischen’, in Batori et al. (1975):107–136. Adam, J. (1998) ‘La qualité des productions discursives: réflexions théoriques et étude de cas’, Cahiers de Linguistique Française 20:13–29. Addison, A. and Vogel, K. (1987) Lehren und Lernen υon Fremdsprachen im Studium: Beiträge zur 2. Göttinger Fachtagung ‘Fremdsprachenausbildung an der Uniυersität’, Bochum: AKS. Aisenstadt, E. (1979) ‘Collocability restrictions in dictionaries’, ITL Review of Applied Lingaistics 45/46:71–74. Aitchison, J. (1994) Words in the Mind: An Introduction to the Mental Lexicon, Oxford: Blackwell. Altenberg, B. (1984) ‘Causal linking in spoken and written English’, Studia linguistica 38:20–69. Altenberg, B. (1998) ‘On the phraseology of spoken English: the evidence of recurrent word combinations’, in Cowie (1998), 101–122. Amancy, N. and Ventura, T. (1992) 50 modèles de dissertation, Alleur: Marabout. Anscombre, J.-C. and Ducrot, O. (1977) ‘Deux mais en français?’, Lingua 43:1–35. Antos, G. (1987) ‘Textmusterwissen. Beschreibungsprobleme am Beispiel von Grußworten’, in Engelkamp et al. (1987):157–189. Antos, G. and Krings, H.-P. (1989) Textproduktion: ein interdisziplinärer Forschungsüberblick, Tübingen: Niemeyer. Arnaud, P.J.L. and Béjoint, H. (1992) Vocabulary and Applied Linguistics, London: Macmillan. Arntz, R. and Thome, G. (1990) Übersetzungswissenschaft: Ergebnisse und Perspektiυen. Festschrift für Wolfram Wilss zum 65. Geburtstag, Tübingen: Narr. Aston, G. (1995) ‘Corpora in language pedagogy’, in Cook and Seidlhofer (1995): 257–270. Auchlin, A. (1998) ‘Argument du Colloque’, Cahiers de linguistique française 20: 8–11. Bahner, W., Schildt, J. and Viehweger, D. (eds) (1991) Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Congress of Linguists, Berlin: Akademie. Baker, M. (1992) In Other Words. A Coursebook on Translation, London: Routledge. Baker, M. (1996) ‘Corpus-based translation studies: the challenges that lie ahead’, in Somers (1996):175–186. Baker, M. (ed.) (1998) Routledge Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies, London and New York: Routledge. Baker, M., Francis, G. and Tognini-Bonelli, E. (eds) (1993) Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.

< previous page

page_330

next page >

< previous page

page_331

next page >

Page 331 Ball, C.N. (1996) ‘Concordances and corpora’, Online. Available: (accessed 14 May 2004). Ballard, M. (1987) La traduction de l’anglais au français, Paris: Nathan. Ballard, M. (ed.) (1995a) Relations discursiυes et traduction, Lille: Presses Universitaires de Lille. Ballard, M. (1995b) ‘La traduction de la conjonction “and” en français’, in Ballard (1995a): 221–290. Bally, C. ([1909] 1951) Traité de Stylistique Française (Vol. 1), Genf: Librairie Georg & Cie. Bange, P. (1987) L’analyse des interactions υerbales. La dame de Caluire: Une consultation, Bern: Lang. Barnbrook, G. (1996) Language and Computers. A Practical Introduction to the Computer Analysis of Language, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Barrera-Vidal, A. et al. (eds) (1986) Französische Sprachlehre und bon usage: Festschrift für Hans-Wilhelm Klein zum 75. Geburtstag, Munich: Hueber. Batori, I. (1975) Syntaktische und semantische Studien zur Koordination, Tübingen: Narr. Baum, R. and Albrecht, J. (eds) (1992) Fachsprache und Terminologie in Geschichte und Gegenwart, Tübingen: Narr. Baumann, K.-D. (1986) ‘Der Versuch einer integrativen Betrachtung des linguistischen Phänomens “Fachtext”’, Deutsch als Fremdsprache 2:106–110. Baumann, K.-D. (1987) ‘Ein integrativer Ansatz zur Analyse von Fachkommunikation unter Berücksichtigung des kommunizierenden Subjekts in ausgewählten Fachtextsorten der Gesellschaftswissenschaften im Englischen und Russischen’, Thesis, University of Leipzig. Baumann, K.-D. (1992) Integrative Fachtextlinguistik, Tübingen: Narr. Baumann, K.-D. and Kalverkämper, H. (1992) Kontrastiυe Fachsprachenforschung, Tübingen: Narr. Becker, J.D. (1975) The Phrasal Lexicon Artificial Intelligence Report No. 28. Bolt Baranek and Newman Inc. Report No. 3081. Belcher, D. and Braine, G. (1995) Academic Writing in a Second Language, Norwood, N.J.: Ablex. Bergenholtz, H. and Mugdan, J. (eds) (1985) Lexikographie und Grammatik (Akten des Essener Kolloquiums zur Grammatik im Wörterbuch, 28.–30.6.1984), Tübingen: Niemeyer. Biber, D. (1993) ‘Representativeness in corpus design’, Literary and Linguistic Computing 8:243–257. Biber, D. et al. (1999) Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English, London: Longman. Bidaud, F. (2002) Structures figées de la conversation. Analyse contrastive français-italien, Frankfurt: Lang. Biès, J. (1982) Passeports pour des temps nouveaux, Paris: Dervy-Livres. Bloor, T. (1996) ‘Three hypothetical strategies in philosophical writing’, in Ventola and Mauranen (1996): 19–44. Blue, G.M. (1993) Language Learning and Success—Studying Through English, Southampton: Modern English Publications. Blum-Kulka, S. et al. (eds) (1989) Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies, Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.

< previous page

page_331

next page >

< previous page

page_332

next page >

Page 332 Blumenthal, P. (1980) La syntaxe du message. Application au français moderne, Tübin-gen: Niemeyer. Blumenthal, P. (1983) ‘Syntax und fachsprachliche Syntax im deutsch-französis-chen Sprachvergleich’, Zeitschrift für französische Sprache und Literatur 93:44–69. Blumenthal, P. (1987) Sprachυergleich Deutsch—Französisch, Tübingen: Niemeyer. Blumenthal, P. (1989) ‘Oppositive Sinnverknüpfung im Deutschen und Französis-chen’, in Gnutzmann (1990):33–68. Blumenthal, P. (1997) Sprachυergleich Deutsch—Französisch (2nd edn), Tübingen: Niemeyer 1997. Blumenthal, P. (2002) ‘Profil combinatoire des noms. Synonymie distinctive et analyse contrastive’, Zeitschrift für französische Sprache und Literatur 112: 115–138. Boillot, H. (1994) 50 modèles de dissertation philosophiques, Alleur: Marabout. Börner, W. and Vogel, K. (eds) (1992) Schreiben in der Fremdsprache, Bochum: AKS. Börner, W. and Vogel, K. (eds) (1993) Wortschatz und Fremdsprachenerwerb, Bochum: AKS. Börner, W. and Vogel, K. (eds) (1998) Kontrast und Äquiυalenz. Beiträge zu Sprachυergleich und Übersetzung, Tübingen: Narr. Bossong, G. (1992) ‘Form und Inhalt in der Europäisierung nicht-europäischer Kultursprachen’, in Baum and Albrecht (1992): 79–114. Boulton, A. et al. (1997/1998) Vidéocours. Anglais: Cours de traduction, Nancy: Université de Nancy 2 (http://www.univ-nancy2.fr/Amphis/VID/page2.html). Braine, G. (1995) ‘Writing in the natural sciences and engineering’, in Belcher and Braine (1995), 113–134. Brauße, U. (1992) ‘Funktionswörter im Wörterbuch’, in Brauße and Viehweger (1992): 1–88. Brauße, U. and Viehweger, D. (eds) (1992) Lexikontheorie und Wörterbuch. Wege der Verbindung υon lexikologischer Forschung und lexikographischer Praxis, Tübingen: Niemeyer. Bresson, D. (1998) ‘Classification des verbes supports (Funktionsverben) de l’alle-mand’, in Cahiers d’Etudes Germaniques 15:53–65. Brinker, K. (1988) Linguistische Textanalyse. Eine Einführung in Grundbegriffe und Methoden, Berlin: Erich Schmidt. Brinkmann, H. (1971) Die deutsche Sprache: Gestalt und Leistung (2nd edn), Düssel-dorf: Schwann. Brinton, L.J. (1996) Pragmatic Markers in English: Grammaticalization and Discourse Functions, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Brown, G. and Yule, G. (1983) Discourse Analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bungarten, T. (ed.) (1981) Wissenschaftssprache. Beiträge zur Methodologie, theoretischen Fundierung und Deskription, München: Fink. Burger, H. (1973) Idiomatik des Deutschen, Tübingen: Niemeyer. Burger, H. (1989) ‘Phraseologismen im allgemeinen einsprachigen Wörterbuch’, in Hausmann et al . (1989): 593–599. Burger, H. (1998) Phraseologie. Eine Einführung am Beispiel des Deutschen, Berlin: Erich Schmidt. Bußmann, H. (1990) Lexikon der Sprachwissenschaft (2nd edn), Stuttgart: Kröner. Bybee, J. and Hopper, P. (2001) Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.

< previous page

page_332

next page >

< previous page

page_333

next page >

Page 333 Candlin, C.N. and Hyland, K. (eds) (1999) Writing: Texts, Processes and Practices, London: Longman. Capra, F. (1983) Das Tao der Physik. Die Konυergenz υon westlicher Wissenschaft und östlicher Philosophie, München: Knaur. Chalker, S. (1996) Collins Cobuild English Guides 9: Linking Words, London: HarperCollins. Chalker, S. and Weiner, E. (1994) The Oxford Dictionary of English Grammar, London: BCA. Chargaff, E. (1986) ‘How scientific papers are written’, Fachsprache 8:106–110. Chesterman, A. (1997) Memes of Translation, Amsterdam: Benjamins. Chirac, J. (1975) ‘La France devant les questions linguistiques’, Discours prononcé par M.Jacques Chirac, Premier Ministre, le 7 fév. 1975, à l’invitation de l’Union Internationale des journalistes et de la presse de la langue française. Paris: Haut Comité de la langue française. Chomsky, N. (1957) Syntactic Structures, The Hague: Mouton. Chuquet, H. and Paillard, M. (1987) Approche linguistique des problèmes de traduction, Paris: Ophrys. Clear, J. (1986) ‘Trawling the language: monitor corpora’, in Snell-Hornby (1986):383–389. Clyne, M. (1981) ‘Culture and discourse structure’, Journal of Pragmatics 5:61–66. Clyne, M. (1987) ‘Cultural differences in the organization of academic texts. English and German’, Journal of Pragmatics 11:211–247. Clyne, M., Hoeks, J. and Kreutz, H.-J. (1988) ‘Cross-cultural responses to academic discourse patterns’, Folia Linguistica 3–4:457–475. Coltier, D. (1988) ‘Introduction et gestion des exemples dans les textes a these’, Pratiques 58:23–41. Connor, U. (1996) Contrastive Rhetoric: Cross-cultural Aspects of Second-language Writing, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Connor, U. and Lauer, J. (1988) ‘Cross-cultural variation in persuasive student writing’, in Purves (1988):138–159. Cook, G. and Seidlhofer, Barbara (eds) (1995) Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics: Studies in Honour of H.G.Widdowson, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cooley, L. and Lewkowicz, J. (1997) ‘Adressing the needs of EFL/ESL postgraduate students’, in Duszak (1997):113– 129. Cooper, C.R. and Greenbaum, S. (eds) (1986) Studying Writing: Linguistic Approaches, Beverly Hills: Sage. Corder, S.P. (1967) ‘The significance of learners’ errors’, International Review of Applied Linguistics 5:161–170. Corder, S.P. (1971) ‘Idiosyncratic dialects and error analysis’, International Review of Applied Linguistics 9:147–159. Corder, S.P. (1974) ‘Error analysis’, in J.Allen and S.Corder (eds) The Edinburgh Course in Applied Linguistics, Vol. 3, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Coulthard, M.R. (ed.) (1994a) Advances in Written Text Analysis, London: Routledge. Coulthard, M.R. (1994b) ‘On analysing and evaluating written text’, in Coulthard (1994a):1–11. Coulthard, M.R. and Sinclair, J.M. (1975) Towards an Analysis of Discourse: The English Used by Teachers and Pupils, London: Oxford University Press. Courdier, G., Faucher, E. and Métrich, R. (1994) Les inυariables difficiles.

< previous page

page_333

next page >

< previous page

page_334

next page >

Page 334

Dictionnaire allemand-français des particules, connecteurs, interjections et autres «mots de la communication» Vol. 1 (3rd edn), Nancy: Groupe de Lexicographie Germanique de l’Université de Nancy II. Courdier, G., Faucher, E. and Métrich, R. (1998) Les inυariables difficiles. Dictionnaire allemand-français des particules, connecteurs, interjections et autres «mots de la communication» Vol. 3 (3rd edn), Nancy: Groupe de Lexicographie Germanique de l’Université de Nancy II. Cowie, A.P. (1975) Oxford Dictionary of Current Idiomatic English (2 vols), Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cowie, A.P. (1992) ‘Multiword lexical units and communicative language teaching’, in Arnaud and Béjoint (1992):1– 12. Cowie, A.P. (ed.) (1998) Phraseology: Theory, Analysis and Applications, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cowie, A.P. (1999) English Dictionaries for Foreign Learners: A History, Oxford: Clarendon Press. Cresswell, A. (2000) ‘Self-monitoring in student writing: developing learner responsibility’, ELT Journal 3:235–244. Crismore, A. and Farnsworth, R. (1990) ‘Metadiscourse in popular and professional science discourse’, in Nash (1990):118–136. Crismore, A., Markkanen, R. and Steffensen, M. (1993) ‘Metadiscourse in persuasive writing: a study of texts written by American and Finnish university students’, Written Communication 10:39–71. Croft, K. (ed.) (1980) Readings on English as a Second Language, Cambridge: Winthrop. Crystal, D. (1995) The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of the English Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crystal, D. (1997) A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics (4th edn), Oxford: Blackwell. Crystal, D. and Davy, D. (1975) Inυestigating English Style, London: Longman. Daneš, F. (1974) Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective, Paris: 1974. DeCock, S. (1998) ‘A recurrent word combination approach to the study of formulae in the speech of native and non-native speakers of English’, International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 3:59–80. Degand, L. (1998) ‘On classifying connectives and coherence relations’, in Stede et al (1998):29–35. Delaveau, A. and Kerleroux, F. (1985) Problèmes et exercices de syntaxe française, Paris: Armand Colin. Delcambre, I. (1997) L’exemplification dans les dissertations. Etude didactique des difficultés des élèυes, Paris: Presses Universitaires du Septentrion. Deyes, A.F. (1978) ‘Towards a linguistic definition of functional varieties of written English’, International Review of Applied Linguistics 16:313–329. Dietrich, R. and Guerrier, B. (1990) Vocabulaire allemand: Le commentaire de texte, Paris: Hachette. Dobrovol’skij, D. (1995) Kognitiυe Aspekte der Idiom-Semantik. Studien zum Thesaurus deutscher Idiome, Tübingen: Narr. Doherty, M. (1992) ‘Informationelle Holzwege: Ein Problem der Übersetzungswissenschaft’, Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 84:30–49. Doherty, M. (1996) ‘Introduction’, Linguistics 34:441–457. Dournon, F. (1994) Dictionnaire des mots et formules célèbres, Paris: Le Robert.

< previous page

page_334

next page >

< previous page

page_335

next page >

Page 335 Drozd, L. and Seibicke, W. (1973) Deutsche Fach- und Wissenschaftssprache. Bestandsaufnahme—Theorie— Geschichte, Wiesbaden. Duszak, A. (1997) Culture and Styles of Academic Discourse, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Dutourd, J. (1985) La gauche la plus bête du monde, Paris: Flammarion. Eggs, E. (1996) ‘Strukturen der Argumentation in Fachtexten’, in Kalverkämper and Baumann (1996):618–636. Ellis, R. (1985) Understanding Second Language Acquisition, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R. (1994) The Study of Second Language Acquisition, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Engel, U. (1994) Syntax der deutschen Gegenwartssprache (3rd edn), Berlin: Schmidt. Engelkamp, J., Lorenz, K. and Sandig, B. (eds) (1987) Wissensrepräsentation und Wissensaustausch. Interdisziplinäres Kolloquium der Niederländischen Tage in Saarbrücken April 1986, St Ingberg: Röhrig. Enkvist, N.E. (ed.) (1982) Impromptu Speech: A Symposium, Åbo: Åbo Akademi. Ettinger, S. (1989) ‘Einige Probleme der lexikographischen Darstellung idiomatischer Einheiten (FranzösischDeutsch)’, in Gréciano (1989):95–115. Fahnestock, J. (1986) ‘Accommodating science: the rhetorical life of scientific facts’, Written Communication 3:275– 296. Feilke, H. (1996) Sprache als soziale Gestalt. Ausdruck, Prägung und die Ordnung der sprachlichen Typik, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp. Ferrari, A. and Manzotti, E. (1998) ‘Sur la qualité (et les qualités) du texte de critique littéraire en Italie’, Cahiers de linguistique française 20:163–195. Firbas, J. (1974) ‘Some aspects of the Czechoslovak approach to problems of functional sentence perspective’, in Daneš (1974):11–37. Firbas. J. (1986) ‘On the dynamics of written communication in the light of the theory of functional sentence perspective’, in Cooper and Greenbaum (1986):40–71. Firth, J.R. (1957) Papers in Linguistics, London: Oxford University Press. Fløttum, K. (1994) ‘A propos de c’est-à-dire et ses correspondants norvégiens’, Cahiers de linguistique française 15:109–130. Fontenelle, T. (1997) Turning a Bilingual Dictionary into a Lexical-Semantic Database, Tübingen: Niemeyer. Francis, G. (1993) ‘A corpus-driven approach to grammar’, in Baker et al. (1993): 137–156. Francis, G. (1994) ‘Labelling discourse: an aspect of nominal-group lexical cohesion’, in Coulthard (1994a):83–101. Francis, G., Hunston, S. and Manning, E. (eds) (1996) Collins Cobuild Grammar Patterns 1: Verbs, London: HarperCollins. Francis, G., Hunston, S. and Manning, E. (eds) (1998) Collins Cobuild Grammar Patterns 2: Nouns and Adjectives, London: HarperCollins. Fraser, B. (1988) ‘Types of English discourse markers’, Acta Linguistica Hungarica 38:19–33. Fraser, B. (1998) ‘Contrastive discourse markers in English’, in Jucker and Ziv (1998):301–326. Fraser, B. and Malamud-Makowski, M. (1996) ‘English and Spanish contrastive discourse markers’, Language Sciences 3:863–881. Freedman, A., Pringle, I. and Yalden, J. (eds) (1983) Learning to Write: First Language/Second Language, London: Longman.

< previous page

page_335

next page >

< previous page

page_336

next page >

Page 336 Freudenstein, R. (ed.) (1989) Error in Foreign Languages: Analysis and Treatment, University of Marburg, Informationszentrum für Fremdsprachenforschung. Friederich, W. (1976) Moderne deutsche Idiomatik. Alphabetisches Wörterbuch mit Definitionen und Beispielen, München: Hueber. Friederich, W. (1996) ‘IF NOT—wenn nicht sogar oder wenn auch nicht’, Lebende Sprachen 4:178–179. Fries, U., Tottie, G. and Schneider, P. (eds) (1994) Creating and Using English Language Corpora. Papers from the Fourteenth International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora, Amsterdam: Rodopi. Fuchs, C. (1980) Paraphrase et théories du langage. Contribution à une histoire des théories linguistiques contemporaines et à la construction d’une théorie énonciative de la paraphrase, Paris: Département de recherches linguistiques, Université de Paris VII (Thèse de doctorat d’Etat). Gabel, S.H. (2000) Über- und Unterrepräsentation im Lernerenglisch: Untersuchungen zum Sprachgebrauch deutscher Schülerinnen und Schüler in interkulturellen Telekommunikationsprojekten, Frankfurt: Lang. Gallagher, J.D. (1981) Cours de Traduction allemand-français. Textes politiques et économiques, Munich/Vienna: Oldenbourg. Gallagher, J.D. (1982) German-English Translation. Texts on Politics and Economics, Munich/Vienna: Oldenbourg. Gallagher, J.D. (1986) ‘English nominal constructions. A problem for the translator and the lexicographer’, Lebende Sprachen 3:108–113. Gallagher, J.D. (1989a) ‘English nominal constructions revisited’, Lebende Sprachen 2:60–67. Gallagher, J.D. (1989b) ‘Quelques remarques sur l’emploi des substantifs abstraits en anglais, en allemand et en français’, Nouυelles de la FIT 4:274–289. Gallagher, J.D. (1992) ‘Erschwerend kommt hinzu, dass… Zur Übersetzung eines mikrosyntaktischen Gliederungssignals’, Lebende Sprachen 3:100–103. Gallagher,J.D. (1993) ‘The quest for equivalence’, Lebende Sprachen 4:150–161. Gallagher, J.D. (1994) ‘Ressemblances et dissemblances: les ressources stylistiques du français et de l’allemand’, Lebende Sprachen 2:66–70. Gallagher, J.D. (1995) ‘L’effacement des connecteurs adversatifs et concessifs en français moderne’, in Ballard (1995a):201–220. Gallagher, J.D. (2000) ‘Les constructions du type ce cancer social qu’est l’exclusion ’, Linguistica Antυerpiensia 34:27– 57. Gallagher, J.D. and Siepmann, D. (in preparation) Écrire en français. Gallagher, J.D., Hannay, M., Mackenzie, J.L. and Siepmann, D. (in preparation) Writing in English: A Guide for Advanced Learners. Galtung, J. (1981) ‘Structure, culture and intellectual style’, Social Science Formation 20:817–856. Gass, S.M. (ed.) (1996) Speech Acts Across Cultures: Challenges to Communication in a Second Language, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Gates, E. (1988) ‘The treatment of multi-word lexemes in some current dictionaries of English’, in Snell-Hornby (1986):99–106. Georgin, R. (1961) Les secrets du style. Un inυentaire précis des moyens d’expression, Paris: Les Editions Sociales Françaises. Gerzymisch-Arbogast, H. (1987) Zur Thema-Rhema-Gliederung in amerikanischen Wirtschaftsfachtexten, Tübingen: Narr.

< previous page

page_336

next page >

< previous page

page_337

next page >

Page 337 Gerzymisch-Arbogast, H. (1994) Übersetzungswissenschaftliches Propädeutikum, Tübingen: Francke. Gil, A. (1995) Textadυerbiale in den romanischen Sprachen: eine integrale Studie zu Konnektoren und Modalisatoren im Spanischen, Französischen und Italienischen, Frankfurt am Main: Lang. Gläser, R. (1979) Fachstile des Englischen, Leipzig: Verlag Enzyklopädie. Gläser, R. (1984) ‘The translation aspect of phraseological units in English and German’, Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 18:123–134. Gläser, R. (1990) Fachtextsorten im Englischen, Tübingen: Narr. Gläser, R. (1992) ‘Methodische Konzepte für das Tertium comparationis in der Fachsprachenforschung—dargestellt an anglistischen und nordistischen Arbeiten’, in Baumann and Kalverkämper (1992):78–92. Glaser, R. (1982) Advances in Instructional Psychology (Vol. 2), Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum. Gnutzmann, C. (ed.) (1988) Fachbezogmer Fremdsprachenunterricht, Tübingen: Narr. Gnutzmann, C. (ed.) (1990) Kontrastiυe Linguistik, Frankfurt am Main: Lang. Gnutzmann, C. and Lange, R. (1990) ‘Kontrastive Linguistik und Fachsprachenanalyse’, in Gnutzmann (1990):85– 116. Godin, H.J.G. (1948) Les Ressources Stylistiques du Français Contemporain, Oxford: Blackwell. Goldberg, J.-A. (1980) ‘Discourse particles: an analysis of the roles of y’know, I mean, well and actually in conversation’, Unpublished thesis, University of Cambridge. Götze, K.H. (1993) Französische Affären. Ansichten υon Frankreich, Frankfurt am Main: Fischer. Grabe, W. and Kaplan, R.B. (1996) Theory and Practice of Writing: An Applied Linguistic Perspective, London: Longman. Graefen, G. (1997) Der wissenschaftliche Artikel—Textart und Textorganisation, Frankfurt: Lang. Granger, S. (1993) ‘International corpus of learner English’, in J.Aarts, P.de Haan and N.Oostdijk (eds) English Language Corpora: Design, Analysis and Exploitation (57–71), Amsterdam: Rodopi. Granger, S. (ed.) (1998a) Learner English on Computer, London: Longman. Granger, S. (1998b) ‘Prefabricated patterns in advanced EFL writing: collocations and formulae’, in Cowie (1998):145–160. Granger, S. and Tyson, S. (1996) ‘Connector usage in the English essay writing of native and non-native EFL speakers of English’, World Englishes 15(1):17–27. Gréciano, G. (ed.) (1989) Europhras 88. Phraséologie Contrastive, Strasbourg: Université des Sciences Humaines, Département d’Etudes Allemandes. Gréciano, G. (ed.) (2000) Micro- et macrolexèmes et leur figement discursif. Etudes de linguistique comparée français-allemand, Louvain/Paris: Peeters. Gréciano, G. and Faucher, E. (1998) ‘Phrasem und Partikel: von der Ähnlichkeit im System zur Interaktion im Text (Dürrenmatt: Der Besuch der alten Dame)’, in: Nouveaux Cahiers d’Allemand 3:239–284. Greenbaum, S. (1992) ‘A new corpus of English: ICE’, in J.Svartvik (ed.) Directions in Corpus Linguistics (171–179), Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Greiner, N., Kornelius, J. and Rovere, G. (eds) (1999) Texte und Kontexte in Sprachen und Kulturen. Festschrift für Jörn Albrecht, Trier: WVT Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.

< previous page

page_337

next page >

< previous page

page_338

next page >

Page 338 Grieve, J. (1996) Dictionary of Contemporary French Connectors, London: Routledge. Gross, G. (1994) ‘Classes d’objets et description des verbes’, Langages 115: 15–30. Gross, G. (1996) Les expressions figées en français. Noms composes et autres locutions, Paris: Gap. Gross, M. (1988) ‘Les limites de la phrase figée’, Langages 90:7–22. Grosz, B.J. and Sidner, C.L. (1986) ‘Attention, intentions and the structure of discourse’, Computational Linguistics 12:175–204. Grote, B., Lenke, N. and Stede, M. (1997) ‘Marking concessions in English and German’, Discourse Processes 24:87– 118. Grünbeck, B. (1976) Moderne deutsch-französische Stilistik auf der Basis des Übersetzungsυergleichs. Teil 1: Ordnungsliebe und logisierende Präzision als Übersetzungsdomi-nanten, Heidelberg: Carl Winter. Guimier, C. (1996) Les adυerbes du français. Le cas des adυerbes en -ment, Paris: Ophrys. Gülich, E. (1970) Makrosyntax der Gliederungssignale im gesprochenen Französisch, München: Fink. Gülich, E. and Kotschi, T. (1987) ‘Les actes de reformulation dans la consultation La dame de Caluire’, in Bange (1987):15–57. Habert, B., Nazarenko, A. and Salem, A. (1997) Les linguistiques de corpus, Paris: Armand Colin. Halliday, M.A.K. (1978) Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning, Sidney: Edward Arnold. Halliday, M.A.K. (1994) An Introduction to Functional Grammar, London: Arnold. Hammerly, H. (1991) Fluency and Accuracy: Toward Balance in Language Teaching and Learning, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Hamp-Lyons, L. (ed.) (1991) Assessing Second Language Writing in Academic Contexts, Norwood, N.J.: Ablex. Hanks, P. (1987) ‘Definitions and explanations’, in Sinclair (1987):116–136. Harras, G. (1989) ‘Zu einer Theorie des lexikographischen Beispiels’, in Hausmann et al. (1989): 607–614. Hasselgren, A.L. (1994) ‘Lexical teddy bears and advanced learners: a study into the ways Norwegian students cope with English vocabulary’, International Journal of Applied Linguistics 4:237–260. Hatim, B. (1997) Communication Across Cultures. Translation Theory and Contrastive Text Linguistics, Exeter: University of Exeter Press. Hatim, B. and Mason, I. (1990) Discourse and the Translator, London: Longman. Hausmann, F.J. (1984) ‘Wortschatzlernen ist Kollokationslernen. Zum Lehren und Lernen französischer Wortverbindungen’, Praxis des neusprachlichen Unterrichts 31:395–406. Hausmann, F.J. (1985) ‘Kollokationen im deutschen Wörterbuch. Ein Beitrag zur Theorie des lexikographischen Beispiels’, in Bergenholtz and Mugdan (1985): 118–129. Hausmann, F.J. (1989) ‘Le dictionnaire de collocations’, in Hausmann et al. (1989):1010–1017. Hausmann, F.J. (1995) ‘Von der Unmöglichkeit der kontrastiven Lexikologie’, in Kromann and Kjaer (1995):19–23. Hausmann, F.J. (1999) ‘Le dictionnaire de collocations—Critères de son organisation’, in Greiner et al. (1999):121– 139.

< previous page

page_338

next page >

< previous page

page_339

next page >

Page 339 Hausmann, F.J. et al. (eds) (1989) Wörterbücher: Ein internationales Handbuch zur Lexikographie, Vol. 1 (Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft; Vol. 5), Berlin/New York: De Gruyter. Heffer, C. and Saunston, H. (eds) (2000) Words in Context: A Tribute to John Sinclair on his Retirement, English Language Research Discourse Analysis Monograph 18 (CD-ROM), University of Birmingham. Heid, U. (1997) Zur Strukturierung υon einsprachigen und kontrastiven elektronischen Wörterbüchern, Niemeyer: Tübingen. Helbig, G. (1988) Lexikon deutscher Partikeln, Leipzig: Verlag Enzyklopädie. Hengst, K. (1985) ‘Gesichtspunkte zur Analyse von Makrostrukturen bei Fachtexten’, Linguistische Studien 133, Reihe A: 41–49. Henschelmann, K. (1977) Kausalität im Satz und im Text. Semantisch-υergleichende Studien zum Französischen und Deutschen, Heidelberg: Winter. Henschelmann, K. (1980) Technik des Übersetzens: Französisch-Deutsch, Heidelberg: Quelle und Meyer. Henschelmann, K. (1988) ‘Überlegungen zur Klassifizierung von Übersetzungsfehlern’, Fremdsprachen lehren und lernen 17:118–132. Henschelmann, K. (1999) Problembewuβtes Übersetzen, Tübingen: Narr. Herbst, T. and Popp, K. (eds) (1999) The Perfect Learners’ Dictionary(?), Tübingen: Niemeyer. Heringer, H.-J. (1999) Das höchste der Gefühle: empirische Studien zur distributiυen Semantik, Tübingen: Stauffenburg. Hermanns, F. (1985) ‘Schreiben im Vergleich’, in Wierlacher (1985):123–139. Hinds, J. (1983) ‘Contrastive rhetoric:Japanese and English’, Text 3:183–195. Hoberg, R. (1987) Sprache und Bildung: Beiträge zum 150. Todestag Wilhelm υon Humboldts (THD-Schriftenreihe Wissenschaft und Technik 35), Darmstadt: THD. Hoey, M. (1991) Patterns of Lexis in Text, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hoey, M. and Houghton, D. (1998) ‘Contrastive analysis and translation’, in Baker (1998):45–49. Hoffmann, L. (1983) ‘Kumulative Analyse wissenschaftlicher Texte als Grundlage für die Beschreibung und Klassifizierung von Fachtextsorten’, Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Wilhelm-Pieck-Uniυersität Rostock, Gesellschaftswissenschaftliche Reihe 32, 1983, Vol. 2, S. 13–17. Hoffmann, L. (1992) ‘Vergleiche in der Fachsprachenforschung’, in Baumann and Kalverkämper (1992):95–107. Hohenadl, C. and Will, R. (1994) Into German. Ein systematisches Übersetzungstraining Englisch-Deutsch, Munich: Hueber. House, J. (1979) ‘Interaktionsnormen in deutschen und englischen Alltagsdialo gen’, Linguistische Berichte 59, 76– 90. House, J. (1982a) ‘Opening and closing Phases in English and German dialogues’, Grazer Linguistische Studien 16:52–83. House, J. (1982b) ‘Conversational strategies in German and English dialogues’, in Nickel and Nehls (1982):131–146. House, J. (1982c) ‘Gambits in deutschen und englischen Alltagsdialogen’, Grazer Linguistische Studien 17/18:110– 132. House, J. (1989a) ‘Politeness in English and German’, in Blum-Kulka et al. (1989): 96–122. House, J. (1989b) ‘Excuse me please: apologizing in a foreign language’, in Kettemann et al. (1989):303–328.

< previous page

page_339

next page >

< previous page

page_340

next page >

Page 340 House, J. (1996) ‘Developing pragmatic fluency in English as a foreign language’, Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18:225–252. House, J. (1997) Translation Quality Assessment: A Model Revisited, Tübingen: Narr. Howarth, P.A. (1993) ‘A phraseological approach to academic writing’, in Blue (1993):70–79. Howarth, P.A. (1996) Phraseology in English Academic Writing. Some Implications for Language Learning and Dictionary Making, Tübingen: Niemeyer. Howarth, P.A. (1998) ‘The phraseology of learners’ academic writing’, in Cowie (1998):161–188. Hubert, M.-C. (1988) Le théâtre, Paris: Armand Colin. Huddleston, R.D. (1971) The Sentence in Written English: A Syntactic Study Based on an Analysis of Scientific Text, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hunston, S. (2001) ‘Colligation, lexis, pattern and text’, in Scott and Thompson (eds) (2001):13–34. Hunston, S. and Francis, G. (2000) Pattern Grammar. A Corpus-driυen Approach to the Lexical Grammar of English, Amsterdam: Benjamins (available: http://shop.ebrary.com). Hutz, M. (1997) Kontrastiυe Fachtextlinguistik für den fachbezogenen Fremdsprachenunterricht: Fachzeitschriftenartikel der Psychologie im interlingualen Vergleich, Trier: WVT. Hyland, K. (1998) ‘Tersuasion and context: the pragmatics of academic metadiscourse’, Journal of Pragmatics 30:437–455. Hyland, K. (1999a) ‘Disciplinary discourses: writer stance in research articles’, in Candlin and Hyland (1999):99–121. Hyland, K. (1999b) ‘Academic attribution: citation and the construction of disciplinary knowledge’, Applied Linguistics 20:341–367. Hyland, K. and Milton, J. (1997) ‘Qualification and certainty in L1 and L2 students’ writing’, Journal of Second Language Writing 6 :183–205. Jackson, H. (1981) ‘A comparison of sentence patterns in English and German’, Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 13:69–81. Jahr, S. (1998) ‘Das explikative Vertextungsmuster in Texten des Wissenschaftstransfers’, Fachsprache 1–2:17–28. James, C. (1980) Contrastive Analysis, London: Longman. James, C. (1994) ‘Don’t shoot my dodo: on the resilience of contrastive and error analysis’, IRAL 32:179–200. Jespersen, J. (1993) ‘Les locutions anaphoriques: à cet égard, il y aurait beaucoup a dire’, in Kahn (1993):27–38. Johansson, S. and Hofland, K. (1994) Towards an English-Norwegian parallel corpus’, in Fries et al. (1994):25–37. Johansson, S. and Oksefjell, S. (eds) (1998) Corpora and Cross-linguistic Research: Theory, Method and Case Studies, Amsterdam/Atlanta: Rodopi. Johns, A. (1993) ‘Written argumentation for real audiences: initiating students into academic cultures and discourses’, TESOL Quarterly 27:75–90. Johns, A. (1995) ‘Teaching classroom and authentic genres: initiating students into academic cultures and discourses’, in Belcher and Braine (1995):277–291. Johns, T. (1998) ‘Kibbitzer 32’ (available: web.bham.ac.uk/johnstf/revis032.htm). Johns, T. and King, P. (1991) Classroom Concordancing. ELR Journal (New Series) Vol. 4, Birmingham: Centre for English Language Studies, University of Birmingham. Jones, S. and Sinclair, J. (1974) ‘English lexical collocations’, Cahier de Lexicologie 24:15–61.

< previous page

page_340

next page >

< previous page

page_341

next page >

Page 341 Jucker, A.H. and Ziv, Y. (eds) (1998) Discourse Markers: Descriptions and Theory, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Julie, K. (1995) Enseigner l’anglais, Paris: Hachette. Kachru, Y. (1983) ‘Linguistics and written discourse in particular languages: contrastive studies: English and Hindi’, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 3:50–77. Kachru, Y. (1995) ‘Cultural meaning and rhetorical styles: toward a framework for contrastive rhetoric’, in Cook and Seidlhofer (1995):171–184. Kahn, G. (1993) Des Pratiques de l’Ecrit, Paris: Hachette. Kalverkämper, H. and Baumann, K.-D. (eds) (1996) Fachliche Textsorten: Komponenten—Relationen—Strategien , Tübingen: Narr. Kappler, A. and Grevel, A. (1995) Tatsachen über Deutschland, Frankfurt: Societäts-Verlag. Kästner, U. (1997) Freies Schreiben in der Fremdsprache—Prozesse und ihre Didaktik , Bochum: AKS-Verlag. Kennedy, G. (1998) An Introduction to Corpus Linguistics, London/New York: Longman. Kenny, D. (1997) ‘(Ab)normal translations: a German-English parallel corpus for investigating normalization in translation’, in Lewandowsk-Tomaszczyk and Melia (1997):387–392. Kettemann, B. et al. (1989) (eds) Englisch als Zweitsprache, Tübingen: Narr. Kjaer, A.L. (1987) ‘Zur Darbietung von Phraseologismen in einsprachigen Wörter-büchern des Deutschen aus der Sicht ausländischer Textproduzenten’, in Korhonen (1987):165–181. Kjellmer, G. (1994) A Dictionary of English Collocations, 3 vols, Oxford: Clarendon. Klein, W. (1986) Second Language Acquisition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kleineidam, H. (1986) ‘Vom “psychologischen Prädikat” zur “Thema-Rhema-Struktur”—Relecture des Kapitels “Wortstellung” in der Französischen Sprachlehre von Klein/Strohmeyer (1958)’, in Barrera-Vidal et al. (1986):173– 191. Klenk, U., Körner, K.-H. and Thümmel, W. (eds) (1989) Variatio Linguarum. Beiträge zu Sprachυergleich und Sprachentwicklung. Festschrift zum 60. Geburtstag υon Gustaυ Ineichen, Stuttgart: Steiner. Kocourek, R. (1982) La langue française de la technique et de la science, Wiesbaden. Koenitz, B. (1978) ‘Die Thema-Rhema-Gliederung—Invarianz bei der Translation’, Linguistische Arbeitsberichte 19:75–91. Koenitz, B. (1982) ‘Invarianz und Variabilität der Thema-Rhema-Gliederung bei der Translation’, Linguistische Arbeitsberichte 37:67−91. Koenitz, B. (1987) Thema-Rhema-Gliederung und Translation, Leipzig: Enzyklopädie. Koller, W. (1992) Einführung in die Ubersetzungswissenschaft, Heidelberg: Quelle&Meyer. Königs, K. (1998) ‘Verbless clauses mit with und ihre Übersetzung’, Lebende Sprachen 3:106–112. Korhonen, J. (ed.) (1987) Beiträge zur allgemeinen und germanistischen Phraseologieforschung. Internationales Symposium in Oulu 13.–15.6. 1986, Univ. Oulu, Veröf-fentlichungen des Germanistischen Instituts 7. Kortmann, B. (1999) Linguistik: Essentials, Berlin: Cornelsen. Kovtyk, B. and Wendt, G. (forthcoming) Ausbildung υon Ubersetzern im neuen geeinten Europa 2004—linguistische, didaktische und psychologische Aspekte, Berlin: Logos. Krenn, H. (1995) Französische Syntax, Berlin: Erich Schmidt.

< previous page

page_341

next page >

< previous page

page_342

next page >

Page 342 Kresta, R. (1995) Realisierungsformen der Interpersonalität in υier linguistischen Fachtextsorten des Englischen und des Deutschen, Frankfurt am Main. Kreutz, H. and Harres, A. (1997) ‘Some observations on the distribution and function of hedging in German and English academic writing’, in Duszak (1997): 181–202. Krings, H.-P. (1986) Was in den Köpfen υon Übersetzern υorgeht. Eine empirische Untersuchung an fortgeschrittenen Französischlernern, Tübingen: Narr. Krings, H.-P. (1987) ‘Der Einfluß des Hin-Übersetzens auf fremdsprachliche Lernprozesse—neue Fragen auf alte Antworten’, in Addison and Vogel (1987): 71–98. Kromann, H.-P. and Kjaer, A.L. (1995) Von der Allgegenwart der Lexikographie: Kontrastiυe Lexikologie als Vorstufe zur zweisprachigen Lexikographie (Akten des internationalen Werkstattgesprächs zur kontrastiven Lexikologie 29.– 30.10.1994 in Kopenhagen), Tübingen: Niemeyer. Krzeszowski, T.P. (1990) Contrasting Languages: The Scope of Contrastive Linguistics, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Kühn, P. (1992) ‘Phraseodidaktik. Entwicklungen, Probleme und Überlegungen für den Muttersprachenunterricht und den Unterricht DaF’, Fremdsprachen lehren und lernen 21:169–189. Kußmaul, P. (1978) ‘Kommunikationskonventionen in Textsorten am Beispiel deutscher und englischer geisteswissenschaftlicher Abhandlungen’, Lebende Sprachen 2:54–57. Labov, W. and Fanshel, D. (1977) Therapeutic Discourse, New York: Academic Press. Lado, R. (1957) Linguistics Across Cultures, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980) Metaphors We Liυe By, Chicago: Chicago University Press. Lamprecht, A. (1956) Grammatik der englischen Sprache, Berlin: Cornelsen-Velhagen & Klasing. Landau, S.I. (1984) Dictionaries: The Art and Craft of Lexicography, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Langacker, R. (1987) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol 1: Theoretical Prerequisites, Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press. Laviosa-Braithwaite, S. (1996) ‘The English Comparable Corpus (ECC): a resource and a methodology for the empirical study of translation’, Ph.D. Thesis, Manchester, Department of Language Engineering, UMIST. Legenhausen, L. (1989) ‘Theoretical and practical problems in error identification’, in Freudenstein (1989):46–53. Lenk, H.E.H. (1999) ‘Der Explizitätsgrad von Bewertungen in der Textsorte “Pressekommentar”: Überlegungen aus der Perspektive des DaF-Unterrichts für Fortgeschrittene’, Beiträge zur Fremdsprachenυermittlung 35:76–115. Lenk, U. (1998) Marking Discourse Coherence: Functions of Discourse Markers in Spoken English, Tübingen: Narr. Levinson, S.C. (1983) Pragmatics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lewandowsk-Tomaszczyk, B. and Melia, P.J. (eds) (1997) Practical Applications in Language Corpora (PALC’97 Proceedings), Lódz: Lódz University Press. Lewis, M. (1993) The Lexical Approach: The State of ELT and a Way Forward, Hove: Language Teaching Publications. Lindner, C. (1994) ‘Unnaturalness in Advanced Learners’ English: A Corpus-

< previous page

page_342

next page >

< previous page

page_343

next page >

Page 343 based Feasibility Study’, Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Freiburg (Germany). Lorenz, G. (1997) Introducing a Learner Corpus of English Writing: The Hidden Potentials of Adjectiυe Intensification, Amsterdam: Rodopi. Lorenz, G. (1998) ‘Overstatement in advanced learners’ writing: stylistic aspects of adjective intensification’, in Granger (1998a):53–66. Lorenz-Bourjot, M. and Lüger, H.-H. (2001) Phraseologie und Phraseodidaktik, Wien: Edition Prasens. Louw, B. (1993) ‘Irony in the text or insincerity in the writer—the diagnostic potential of semantic prosodies’, in Baker et al. (1993):157–176. Lozes, M. and Lozes,J. (1994) Version anglaise (Filière LEA), Paris: PUF. Lüger, H.-H. (1996) ‘Satzwertige Phraseologismen im Text. Elemente eines Mehrebenenmodells’, Beiträge zur Fremdsprachenυermittlung 30:76–103. Lyons, J. (1977) Semantics,Vol. 1, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Macheiner, J. (1995) Übersetzen: ein Vademecum, Frankfurt: Eichborn. MacNamara, M. (1995) ‘Some French intersentence connectors in a journalistic corpus and their English translations’, in Ballard (1995a):141–156. Malblanc, A. (1961) Stylistique comparée du français et de l’allemand, Paris: Didier. Mann, W.C. (1999) Introduction to Rhetorical Structure Theory. Online (available: ) (accessed 14 May 2004). Mann, W.C. and Thompson, S.A. (1988) ‘Rhetorical structure theory: toward a functional theory of text organization’, Text 8(3):243–281. Marco, M.J.L. (1999) ‘Procedural vocabulary: lexical signalling of conceptual relations in discourse’, Applied Linguistics 20(1):1–21. Martin, J.R. (1992) English Text. System and Structure, Amsterdam: Benjamins. Martin, R. (1989) ‘L’exemple lexicographique dans le dictionnaire monolingue’, in Hausmann et al. (1989):599–607. Martins-Baltar, M. (2000) ‘Les énoncés usuels et le modèle motif↔réaction’, in Gréciano (2000):93–106. Matesic, J. (ed.) (1983) Phraseologie und ihre Aufgaben. Beiträge zum 1. Internationalen Phraseologie-Symposium υom 12. bis 14. Oktober 1981 in Mannheim, Heidelberg: Groos. Mathiot, M. (ed.) (1979a) Ethnolinguistics: Boas, Sapir and Whorf Revisited, The Hague: Mouton. Mathiot, M. (1979b) ‘Folk definitions as a tool for the analysis of lexical meaning’, in Mathiot (1979a):121–160. Mattheier, K.J. (1997) Norm und Variation, Frankfurt: Lang. Mauranen, A. (1993) Cultural Differences in Academic Rhetoric: A Textlinguistic Study, Frankfurt: Lang. McEnery, T. and Wilson, A. (1996) Corpus Linguistics, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. McArthur, T. (1981) Longman Lexicon of Contemporary English, London: Longman. Me.ijs, W. (ed.) (1987) Corpus Linguistics and Beyond: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora, Amsterdam: Rodopi. Mel’čuk, I. (1981) ‘Meaning-text models: a recent trend in Soviet linguistics’, Annual Reυiew of Anthropology 10:27– 62. Métrich, R. (1993) Lexicographie bilingue des particules illocutoires de l’allemand, Göppingen: Kümmerle.

< previous page

page_343

next page >

< previous page

page_344

next page >

Page 344 Métrich, R. (1997a) ‘De la traduction des mots de la communication dans le couple allemand-français’, Nouveaux Cahiers d’Allemand 3:323–361. Métrich, R. (1997b) ‘De la non-traduction des “mots de la communication” de l’allemand en français’, Zeitschrift für französische Sprache und Literatur 2:143–172. Métrich, R. (1998) ‘Wie übersetzt man eigentlich Partikeln?’, in Börner and Vogel (1998):194–207. Meyer, P.G. (1996) ‘Nicht fachgebundene Lexik in Wissenschaftstexten: Versuch einer Klassifikation und Einschätzung ihrer Funktion’, in Kalverkämper and Baumann (1996):175–192. Meyer, P.G. (1997) Coming to Know: Essays in the Lexical Semantics and Pragmatics of Academic English, Tübingen: Narr. Mikes, G. (1966) How to be an Alien, London: Penguin. Millis, K.K., Golding, J.M. and Barker, G. (1995) ‘Causal connectives increase inference generation’, Discourse Processes 20:29–50. Milton, J. (1999) ‘Lexical thickets and electronic gateways: making text accessible by novice writers’, in Candlin and Hyland (1999):221–243. Monet, D. (1995) Le multimédia, Paris: Flammarion. Moon, R. (1987) ‘The analysis of meaning’, in Sinclair (1987):86–103. Moon, R. (1998) Fixed Expressions and Idioms in English: A Corpus-Based Approach, Oxford: Clarendon. Moore, D. (ed.) (1995) L’éυeil au langage. Notions en questions. Vol. 1, Paris: Didier Erudition. Murat, M. and Cartier-Bresson, B. (1987) ‘ C’est-à-dire ou la reprise interprétative’, Langue française 73:5–15. Myers, G. (1989) ‘The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles’, Applied Linguistics 10:1–35. Nash, W. (1980) Designs in Prose, London/New York: Longman. Nash, W. (1986) English Usage, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Nash, W. (ed.) (1990) The Writing Scholar. Studies in Academic Discourse, London: Sage. Nash-Webber, B.L. and Schank, R. (eds) (1975) Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing, Cambridge, Mass.: Bolt, Beranek and Newman. Nattinger, J.R. and DeCarrico, J.S. (1992) Lexical Phrases and Language Teaching, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ndiaye, M. (1999) ‘Les deux status de sinon ’, L’information grammaticale 80:8–12. Newsham, G. (1977) ‘The Paragraph in French and English’, Unpublished thesis, University of Montreal. Nickel, G. and Nehls, D. (eds) (1982) Error Analysis, Contrastive Linguistics and Second Language Learning, Heidelberg: Groos. Nojgaard, M. (1992/1993/1995) Les adυerbes français. Essai de description fonctionnelle, Kopenhagen: Munksgaard. Nord, C. (1993) Einführung in das funktionale Übersetzen, Tübingen: Francke. Nuccorini, S. (2002) Phrases and Phraseology—Data and Descriptions , Bern: Peter Lang. Oakey, D.J. (2002a) ‘Lexical phrases for teaching academic writing in English: corpus evidence’, in Nuccorini (2002):85–105. Oakey, D.J. (2002b) ‘A corpus-based study of the formal and functional variation of a lexical phrase in different academic disciplines in English’, in Reppen et al. (2002):111–130.

< previous page

page_344

next page >

< previous page

page_345

next page >

Page 345 Oates, S.L. (1999) State of the Art Report on Discourse Markers and Relations, Brighton: ITRI, University of Brighton. Online (available: ) (accessed 14 May 2004). Östman, J.-O. (1982) The symbiotic relationship between pragmatic particles and impromptu speech’, in Enkvist (1982):147–177. Oldenburg, H. (1992) Angewandte Fachtextlinguistik: ‘Conclusions’und Zusammenfassungen, Tübingen: Narr. Øveras, L. (1996) ‘In Search of the Third Code. An Investigation of Norms in Literary Translation’, ‘Hovedfag’ thesis. Oslo: Oslo University. Paquette, A. and Roehner, B. (1991) Science in English, Paris: Belin. Partington, A. (1998) Patterns and Meanings. Using Corpora for English Language Research and Teaching, Amsterdam: Benjamins. Pearson, J. (1998) Terms in Context, Amsterdam: Benjamins. Petermann, J. (1983) ‘Zur Erstellung ein- und zweisprachiger phraseologischer Wörterbücher: Prinzipien der formalen Gestaltung und der Einordnung von Phrasemen’, in Matesic (1983):172–191. Pindi, J.-T. and Bloor, T. (1986) ‘Playing safe with predictions: hedging, attribution, and conditions in human forecasting’, Written Language (CILT 55):555–569. Plag, I. and Schneider, K.P. (eds) (2000) Language Use, Language Acquisition and Language History (mostly empirical studies in honour of Rüdiger Zimmermann), Trier: WTV. Pöckl, W. (1995) ‘Nationalstile in Fachtexten? Vom Tabu- zum Modethema’, Fachsprache 17(3–4):98–107. Procter, P. (ed.) (1995) Cambridge International Dictionary of English, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Purves, A.C. (ed.) (1988) Writing Across Languages and Cultures: Issues in Contrastive Rhetoric, Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage. Quillard, G. and Akhras, G. (1996) ‘ And/et. Analyse distributionnelle de la conjonction copulative en français et en anglais’, Meta 41:459–470. Quirk, R. et al. (1972) A Grammar of Contemporary English, London: Longman. Quirk, R. et al. (1985) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, London: Longman. Raible, W. (1992) Junktion: eine Dimension der Sprache und ihre Realisierungsformen zwischen Aggregation und Integration, Heidelberg: Winter. Reboul, A. and Moeschler, J. (1998) ‘Théorie de l’esprit, rationalité et principe de charité: l’évaluation de la qualité des textes’, Cahiers de linguistique française 20: 209–227. Reiß, K. and Vermeer, H.J. (1984) Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie, Tübingen: Niemeyer. Reppen, R., Fitzmaurice, S.M. and Biber, D. (2002) Using Corpora to Explore Linguistic Variation, Amsterdam: Benjamins. Rey-Debove, J. (1971) Etude linguistique et sémiotique des dictionnaires français contemporains, The Hague and Paris: Mouton. Richaudeau, F. (1992) Ecrire aυec efficacité, Paris: Albin Michel. Ringbom, H. (1996) ‘Vocabulary frequencies in an international corpus of advanced learner English’, Paper presented at SLRF ’96 (Second Language Research Forum), Tucson (Arizona), October. Ringbom, H. (1998) ‘Vocabulary frequencies in advanced learner English: a cross-linguistic approach’, in Granger (1998a):41–52.

< previous page

page_345

next page >

< previous page

page_346

next page >

Page 346 Ripfel, M. (1989) Wörterbuchkritik. Eine empirische Analyse υon Wörterbuchrezensionen, Tübingen: Niemeyer. Risselada, R. and Spooren, W. (1998) ‘lntroduction: discourse markers and coherence relations’, Journal of Pragmatics 30:131–133. Robitaille, L.-B. (1995) Et Dieu créa les Français, Montréal: RD. Rohdenburg, G. (1998) ‘Subordinate clauses introduced by interpretative verbs in English and their less explicit counterparts in German’, in Börner and Vogel (1998):233–249. Roos, E. (1976) ‘Contrastive collocational analysis’, Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 5:65–75. Rosch, E.H. (1973) ‘Natural categories’, Cognitive Psychology 4:328–350. Roulet, E. (1979) Linguistic Theory, Linguistic Description and Language Teaching, London: Longman. Roulet, E. (2000) La description de l’organisation du discours. Du dialogue au texte, Paris: 00h00.com. Roulet, E. et al. (1991) L’articulation du discours en français contemporain (2nd edn), Bern: Lang. Rounds, P. (1982) Hedging in Written Academic Discourse: Precision and Flexibility, The University of Michigan (mimeo). Rousseau, J. and Demarty-Warzée, J. (2000) Français de l’aυenir et aυenir du français, Paris: 00h00.com. Rudolph, E. (1991) ‘Textual functions of the connections of contrast’, in Bahner, Schildt and Viehweger (1991):2216– 2219. Rudolph, E. (1996) Contrast. Adυersatiυe and Concessiυe Relations and their Expressions in English, German, Spanish, Portuguese on Sentence and Text Level, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Rüschoff, B. and Wolff, D. (1999) Fremdsprachenlernen in der Wissensgesellschaft, Munich: Hueber. Sachtleber, S. (1993) ‘Textstile in der Wissenschaftssprache’, in Schröder (1993): 61–79. Sager, J.C. (1994) Language Engineering and Translation, Amsterdam: Benjamins. Salager-Meyer, F. (1994) ‘Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English written discourse’, English for Specific Purposes 13:149–169. Salkie, R. and Oates, S.-L. (1999) ‘Contrast and concession in French and English’, Languages in Contrast 2(1):27– 56. Sanders, W. (1996) Gutes Deutsch—besseres Deutsch. Praktische Stillehre der deutschen Gegenwartssprache, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Schemann, H. (1989) ‘Das phraseologische Wörterbuch’, in Hausmann et al. (1989):1019–1032. Schemann, H. (1991) Deutsche Idiomatik: die deutschen Redewendungen im Kontext, Stuttgart: Klett. Scherfer, P. (2001) ‘Zu einigen wesentlichen Merkmalen lexikalischer Kollokationen’, in Lorenz-Bourjot and Lüger (2001):3–20. Schiffrin, D. (1987) Discourse Markers, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schmidt, H. (1996) ‘Der übersetzungsorientierte Vergleich textsortentypischer Makrostrukturen’, in Kalverkämper and Baumann (1996):426–447. Schmied, J. (1987) ‘Qualitative and quantitative research approaches to English relative constructions’, in Meijs (1987):295–302.

< previous page

page_346

next page >

< previous page

page_347

next page >

Page 347 Schmitt, P.A. (1990) ‘Die Berufspraxis der Übersetzer: Eine Umfrageanalyse’, Mitteilungsblatt für Dolmetscher und Übersetzer, Berichtssonderheft, Februar. Schneider, H.J. (1992) Phantasie und Kalkül: Über die Polarität υon Handlungen und Struktur in der Sprache, Frankfurt am Main. Schröder, H. (1988) ‘Fachtext, interkulturelle Kommunikation und Aufgaben einer spezialisierten Didaktik/Methodik des fachbezogenen Fremdsprachenunterrichts’, in Gnutzmann (1988):107–124. Schröder, H. (ed.) (1991) Subject-oriented Texts: Languages for Special Purposes and Text Theory, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Schröder, H. (ed.) (1993) Fachtextpragmatik, Tübingen: Narr. Schwanzer, V. (1981) ‘Syntaktisch-stilistische Universalia in den wissenschaftlichen Fachsprachen’, in Bungarten (1981):213–230. Scott, M. and Thompson, G. (eds) (2001) Patterns of Text. In Honour of Michael Hoey, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins (available: http://shop.ebrary.com). Selinker, L. (1972) ‘Interlanguage’, International Review of Applied Linguistics 10: 209–230. Selinker, L. (1992) Rediscovering Interlanguage, London: Longman. Siepmann, D. (1996) Übersetzungslehrbücher: Perspektiυen für ihre Entwicklung, Bochum: Brockmeyer. Siepmann, D. (1998) Review of ‘John Sinclair (ed.), Collins Cobuild English Collocations on CD-ROM, London: HarperCollins 1995’, Fremdsprachen und Hochschule 53: 134–137. Siepmann, D. (1999) ‘Linguistique de corpus et grammaire: une nouvelle donne pour l’enseignement du français langue étrangère’, französisch heute 3:309–327. Siepmann, D. (2000) ‘Second-level discourse markers across languages’, Languages in Contrast 2:253–288. Siepmann, D. (2001a) ‘Multi-word discourse markers in translation: a corpus-based investigation into restrictors’, Lebende Sprachen 3:97–107. Siepmann, D. (2001b) ‘Recueils de vocabulaire: revue de détail’, Lebende Sprachen 4:170–175. Siepmann, D. (2002a) Entraînement au thème allemand, Paris: Ellipses. Siepmann, D. (2002b) ‘Eigenschaften und Formen lexikalischer Kollokationen: Wider ein zu enges Verständnis’, Zeitschrift für französische Sprache und Literatur 112:260–283. Siepmann, D. (2003a) ‘Collocations in trilingual perspective: new evidence from large corpora and implications for dictionary making’, Cahiers de Lexicologie 83: 173–196. Siepmann, D. (2003b) ‘Schreiben in der Fremdsprache auf der gymnasialen Oberstufe: acht Thesen zur bestehenden Praxis im Englischunterricht und Vorschläge für einen Teillehrplan’, Neusprachliche Mitteilungen aus Wissenschaft und Praxis 1:24–32. Siepmann, D. (2004) ‘High-profile translation from the mother tongue into the foreign language: effective translation strategies and implications for translation theory and translator training’, Lebende Sprachen 2:56–64. Siepmann, D. (forthcoming) ‘Linguistische und didaktische Aspekte der Überset-zung von Mehrwortdiskursmarkern am Beispiel der Suggestoren’, in Kovtyk and Wendt (forthcoming). Sinclair, J.M. (ed.) (1987) Looking Up. An Account of the COBUILD Project in Lexical Computing, London: Collins.

< previous page

page_347

next page >

< previous page

page_348

next page >

Page 348 Sinclair, J.M. (1988) ‘Naturalness in language’, English Language Research Journal (University of Birmingham) 2:11– 18. Sinclair, J.M. (1991) Corpus, Concordance, Collocation, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sinclair, J.M. (1993) ‘Text corpora: lexicographers’ needs’, Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 1:5–14. Sinclair, J.M. (ed.) (1995) Collins Cobuild English Dictionary, London: Harper-Collins. Sinclair, J.M. (1996) ‘The search for units of meaning’, Textus 9:75–106. Sinhaneti, K. (1982) ‘Strategy in ESP-reading through the understanding of discourse markers by non-native speakers of English’, Fachsprache 4:125–133. Skudlik, S. (1990) Sprache in Wissenschaften. Deutsch und Englisch in der internationalen Kommunikation, Tübingen: Narr. Smith, V. and Klein-Braley, C. (1985) In Other Words. Arbeitsbuch Übersetzung, Munich: Hueber. Snell-Hornby, M. (ed.) (1986) ZüriLEX’86 Proceedings. Papers Read at the Euralex International Congress, Tübingen: Francke. Söll, L. (1985) Gesprochenes und geschriebenes Französisch, Berlin: Schmidt. Somers, H.L. (ed.) (1996) Terminology, LSP and Translation: Studies in Language Engineering in Honour of Juan C.Sager, Amsterdam: Benjamins. Speight, S. (1998) Right or Wrong? Spotting Mistakes and Borderline Cases, Berlin: Cornelsen. Stede, M., Wanner, L. and Hovy, E. (1998) Discourse Relations and Discourse Markers, Proceedings of the Workshop —COLING-ACL’98, August 1999, Montreal: University of Montreal. Stein, G. (1999) ‘Exemplification in EFL dictionaries’, in Herbst and Popp (eds) (1999):45–70. Stein, S. (2001) ‘Formelhafte Texte—Musterhaftigkeit an der Schnittstelle zwischen Phraseologie und Textlinguistik’, in Lorenz-Bourjot and Lüger (2001): 21–40. Steiner, G. (1998) After Babel. Aspects of Language and Translation (3rd edn), Oxford: Oxford University Press. Stolze, R. and Deppert, A. (1998) ‘Übersetzung und Verständlichkeit deutscher und englischer Wissenschaftstexte’, Fachsprache 20:116–129. Stubbs, M. (1993) ‘British traditions in text analysis: from Firth to Sinclair’, in Baker et al. (1993):1–33. Stubbs, M. (1995) ‘Corpus evidence for norms of lexical collocation’, in Cook and Seidlhofer (1995):245–256. Stubbs, M. (1996) Text and Corpus Analysis: Computer-assisted Studies of Language and Culture, Oxford: Blackwell. Stubbs, M. (1997) ‘Eine Sprache idiomatisch sprechen: Computer, Korpora, kommunikative Kompetenz und Kultur’, in Mattheier (1997):151–167. Stubbs, M. (2000) ‘Using very large text collections to study semantic schemas: a research note’, in Heffer and Saunston (2000). Swales, J.M. et al. (1998) ‘ Consider this: the role of imperatives in scholarly writing’, Applied Linguistics 19:97–121. Swan, M. (1984) Practical English Usage, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Tadros, A. (1985) Prediction in Text, University of Birmingham: English Language Research.

< previous page

page_348

next page >

< previous page

page_349

next page >

Page 349 Tadros, A. (1994) ‘Predictive categories in expository text’, in Coulthard (1994a): 69–82. Tamba, I. (1987) ‘ Ou dans les tours du type: “Un bienfaiteur public ou évergète’”, Langue française 73:16–28. Tesnière, L. (1959) Elements de syntaxe structurale, Paris: Klincksieck. Thiel, G. and Thome, G. (1996) ‘Fachlichkeit in wissenschaftsjournalistischen Texten. Dargestellt am Gebrauch von Nomina mit hypothetischer Bedeutung (Deutsch-Englisch-Französisch)’, in Kalverkämper and Baumann (1996): 746– 773. Thompson, G. (1996) Introducing Functional Grammar, London: Arnold. Togeby, K. (1982–1985) Grammaire française, Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag. Trier, J. (1931) Der deutsche Wortschatz im Sinnbezirk des Verstandes: die Geschichte eines sprachlichen Feldes, Heidelberg: Winter. Truffaut, L. (1983) Problèmes linguistiques de traduction allemand-français. Guide de l’étudiant et du praticien, Munich: Hueber. Trumpp, E.C. (1998) Fachtextsorten kontrastiυ: Englisch-Deutsch-Französisch, Tübingen: Narr. van Dijk, T. (1972) Some Aspects of Text Grammars: A Study in Theoretical Linguistics and Poetics, The Hague: Mouton. Vande Kopple, W.J. (1985) ‘Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse’, College Composition and Communication 36(1):82–93. Vann, R.J., Lorenz, F.O. and Meyer, D.M. (1991) ‘Error gravity: faculty response to errors in the written discourse of non-native speakers of English’, in Hamp-Lyons (1991):181–196. Ventola, E. (1996) ‘Packing and unpacking of information in academic texts’, in Ventola and Mauranen (1996):153– 194. Ventola, E. and Mauranen, A. (1996) Academic Writing: Intercultural and Textual Issues, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Vigner, G. (1982) Eléments pour une pédagogie de la production écrite, Paris: Clé International. Vinay, J.-P. and Darbelnet, J. (1958) Stylistique comparée du français et de l’anglais. Méthode de traduction, Paris: Didier. Vogel, K. (1990) Lernersprache: linguistische und psycholinguistische Grundfragen zu ihrer Erforschung, Tübingen: Narr. Warner, R.G. (1985) Discourse Connectives in English, New York: Garland. Warvik, B. (ed.) (1995) Organization in Discourse. Proceedings from the Turku Conference (Anglicana Turkuensia: 14), Turku: University of Turku. Weber, S. (1991) ‘Communicative acts and the constitution of scientific and technical texts’, in Schröder (1991):267– 300. Weinrich, H. (1961) ‘Die clarté der französischen Sprache und die Klarheit der Franzosen’, Zeitschrift für Romanische Philologie 77:528–544. Weydt, H. (ed.) (1983) Partikeln und Interaktion, Tübingen: Niemeyer. Widdowson, H.G. (1979) Aspects of Language Teaching, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Widdowson, H.G. (1983) Learning Purpose and Language Use, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wierlacher, A. (ed.) (1985) Das Fremde und das Eigene: Prolegomena zu einer interkulturellen Germanistik, München: Iudicium. Wilkins, D.A. (1976) Notional Syllabuses, London: Oxford University Press.

< previous page

page_349

next page >

< previous page

page_350

next page >

Page 350 Williams, J.M. (1990) Style: Toward Clarity and Grace, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Wilss, W. (1996) Übersetzungsunterricht: Eine Einführung, Tübingen: Narr. Winter, E. (1982) Towards a Contextual Grammar of English: The Clause and its Place in the Definition of Sentence, London: Allen and Unwin. Winter, E. (1994) ‘Clause relations as information structure: two basic text structures in English’, in Coulthard (1994a):46–68. Wolff, D. (1989) ‘Zweitsprachliche und muttersprachliche Textproduktion fortgeschrittener Englischlerner im Vergleich’, in Kettemann et al. (1989):353–374. Wolff, D. (2002) Fremdsprachenlernen als Konstruktion: Grundlagen für eine konstruktiυistische Fremdsprachendidaktik, Frankfurt: Lang. Wray, A. (2000) ‘Formulaic sequences in second language teaching: principle and practice’, Applied Linguistics 21(4):463–489.

< previous page

page_350

next page >

< previous page

page_351

Page 351 Index Note: page numbers in italics refer to figures or tables

à saυoir 161–3, 177, 183, 187–8 à saυoir que 185 acronyms 174–5 again 209 ainsi que 65 Aisenstadt, E. 46 alias 154 all in all 191 allerdings 239 also called 152–3, 191–4, 218 also (English) 177 also (German) 169–70, 177 Altenberg, B. 48–9 alternatively named 152–3 and, indirectly 187 announcers 93, 99 answer markers 94 any kind of 261 any more than 319 appositives 141–3, 147, 158, 164 Aristotle 112, 116 article use 136, 248, 320 as already mentioned 212, 263 as already noted 212–13 as quoted 263 as when 187 as with…so with 275 at all 261 at least…if not 202 attributors 97 auch…genannt 173–4 aussi n’est-il pas étonnant de 232 autrement dit 157, 190, 230 autrement nommé 164 aυons-nous écrit 209 Balladur, Edouard 41 Bally, C. viii, 7, 46 Bank of English 25, 47 Baumann, K.-D. 42–3 Beispiel phrases 130–1, 133–4, 135, 137–8 besser bekannt als 206–8 besser gesagt 261 betrachten wir 121 better described as 206–8 beziehungsweise 175 Biber, D. 29 bref 188 Britannica CD 26 British National Corpus 28 Bußmann, H. 42 Burger, H. 298 Butler, Samuel 34

Cambridge International Dictionary of English 284 can/may 276–7 Capra, F. 280–1 Cartier-Bresson, B. 144, 146–7, 163, 177–8 cause and reason markers 92 ce n’est pas dire que 226 ceci dit 285 cela dit 239, 308 cela pour illustrer 115–16 cela υeut dire que 230–1 c’est-à-dire 144–7, 177–88, 218 c’est-à-dire (que) 158–61 c’est dire 229, 230 c’est dire combien 225 c’est dire que 223–4 c’est tout dire 225–6 Chalker, S. 38 Chomsky, Noam viii, 5, 247 ci-après 165 citational devices 117

next page >

clarification markers 95, 96

< previous page

page_351

next page >

< previous page

page_352

Page 352 Clyne, M. 108, 263 co-creations 45–6 The Cobuild Collocations CD-ROM 8 Collins Cobuild English Dictionary 250, 284, 293, 295, 300, 301, 310 Collins Cobuild Grammar Patterns 1: Verbs 56–7 The Collins German Dictionary 288 collocations 6–7, 36–7, 41, 45–7, 48; adjective-noun 133–6, 141, 273–4; corpus-based analysis 302–3; English/German 14–15; extended 36; Hausmann 45–6; long-distance 82, 102, 325; noun-verb 70, 131–8; reformulators 200; rhetoric 103, 104–5 Coltier, D. 111, 112 comme 65 comparison markers 88, 102, 284, 309–10 computer corpora ix, 7–9, 10–11, 14, 15–16, 243 concession markers 88–9, 104–5, 293–4 conclude 236, 236 concluders 91, 99 connectors 35–6, 141, 288–90; see also zero connectors consider 107, 121 considérer 121, 294 contrast markers 88, 99, 103 contrastive analysis viii, 3–4, 17–19, 327 n4; Clyne 108; computer corpora 10–11, 15–16; equivalence 16–17; errors 246–7; interlanguage 245, 252–3 copular clauses 130–1 Corder, S.P. 247 corpora 22–5, 126–7, 250–2, 302–3 counter-creations 45–6 Courdier, G. 40, 177 Covey, Stephen R. 1 Crismore, A. 83 cross-references 304 Crystal, D. 38

dafür 320 damit soll nicht gesagt sein, dass 226–7 d’après ce qui précède 234–5 Darbelnet, J. 108, 110, 239 das Entscheidende dabei ist, dass 280 das heiβt 177, 218, 219, 257 de cela il découle que 230–1 debate 249–50 DeCarrico, J.S. 39, 52–4 deduce 236 definers 90–1 definitions 305–7 Delcambre, I. 111, 114, 117 demonstration clauses 128–30 Deppert, A. 108 der Punkt ist, dass 280 désormais 192 d.h. 170–2 diachronic labels 304 dictionaries: bilingual 283–8, 305, 320–4; connectors 288–90; electronic 308, 323; exemplifiers 293; meaning 283–4; metalanguage 299–305; monolingual 283–8; phraseology 305–6; sample entries 308–9, 310–20 dies bedeutet, dass 227–8 Dietrich, R. 289 digression markers 94, 296

next page >

discourse markers 37–9, 43–5, 88; classification 21–2, 85; dictionary entries 311–17; extralinguistic/intralinguistic 41–3; French 108; frequency of use 255–71; German writers in English 252–78; multi-word 34–5, 45–52, 50–1; natural language strings 45; oral 4, 38–9, 44–5; rhetoric 326; single-word 83; taxonomy 26–7; see also first-level discourse markers; second-level discourse markers disons-le carrément 205 disons le mot 205 disons même 205 disons-nous 208 dit autrement 157–8 Dobrovol’skij, D. 45–8, 47 donc 189 donner 320 donner+exemple 132 dorénaυant nommé 165 doute 294 du moins 181 Dughera, Jacques 41

eben 173 Eggs, E. 19 Einstein, Albert v elaboration relation 94, 95, 96, 114–15, 143, 219 emotive clusters 134 emphasizers 95, 211

< previous page

page_352

next page >

< previous page

page_353

Page 353 emphatics 86 en abrégé 165, 192, 194, 320 en bref 188 en d’autres mots 157 en d’autres termes 155, 157, 177, 180, 188–91, 218 en somme 188, 189 en tout cas 180–1 encore appelé 164, 165–6, 191–4 encore et toujours 209 encore une fois 209 Encyclopaedia Britannica 33 enfin 181 English language: connectors 141; copular clauses 130–1; exemplifiers 107; inferrers 221–3; infinitive clauses 126, 127; linkers 211–13; reformulators 147–55, 156, 177–94; sentence fragments 55, 56–61; set expressions 54, 55, 56; SLDMs 54–62 entnehmen 236 enumerators 91, 99, 109–10, 114 epilinguistic function 307–8 equation markers 284 equivalence 16–17, 49, 231 error analysis 246–52, 271–8, 302 errors: context-independent 267, 268, 269–70; contrastive analysis 246–7; exemplifiers 258; inferrers 273; lexico-grammatical 254, 271, 274–5; prepositional 253; semantic-functional 271, 275–7; translation 248–9; valency 272–4; verb form 248 es ist anzumerken 322 especially 183 en zeigt sich also dass, 229 et plus exactement 180 Ettinger, H. 303 etymology 305 eυen 200 evidence markers 116, 293–4 example 123–4, 137–8, 295–6; equivalents 135; etymology of 112; practical 133–4; sentence patterns 128, 130; see also for example examples 116, 306, 307–8 excluders 93, 94 exemple phrases 130, 132, 133–4, 135, 137–8, 141 exemplification 111–12, 113, 116–17, 324 exemplifiers 4, 99–100; dictionaries 293; English 107; errors 258; for example 89, 90, 301; French 127–8; frequency counts 122–3; German writers of English 255–7; Hutz 109; infinitive clauses 124–8, 139, 141; non-compositional 130–1; rhetoric 112–18; subordinate clauses 139, 140; types 118–39 explainers 89–90 Fanshel, D. 37–8 Farnsworth, R. 83 Feilke, H. 5, 47

next page >

field labels 303 fillers 37–8 first-level discourse markers 100, 239 Firth, J.R. 5, 21, 46 Fløttum, K. 147, 159 Fontenelle, T. 324 for instance 255 for short 153, 192 foreign language teaching ix–x, 104–5, 243–4, 250–1, 271, 325–6 fortan 175 Francis, G. 5, 10, 14, 47, 49, 56 Fraser, B. 85 French language: concession markers 104; connectors 35–6, 141, 289–90; copular clauses 130–1; discourse markers 108; evaluators 40–1; exemplifiers 127–8; hortatives 120; inferrers 223–6; infinitive clauses 69, 126; linkers 213–15; prepositional phrases 71; punctuation 178; reformulators 155–67, 168; sentence fragments 64, 65–72; sentence-integrated markers 64, 72–3; sentential relative clauses 71; set expressions 63–5; SLDMs 62–73, 239; zero connector 194 Friederich, W. 303 Fuchs, C. 111 Gabel, S.H. 31, 33 Gabler Wirtschaftslexikon CD-ROM 26 Gallagher, J.D. 3, 10, 49, 109, 193, 309 Gates, E. 284, 297 genauer 206, 207 geographical labels 303–4 Georgin, R. 48–50 German language: acronyms 174–5; collocations 133–4, 135–6; connectors 141; copular clauses 130–1; gerund clauses 80;

< previous page

page_353

next page >

< previous page

page_354

Page 354 imperatives 121; inferrers 226–8; infinitive clauses 79, 126, 127; linkers 215–16; middle voice 77; participial clauses 80; reformulators 167–76; relative clauses 174; restrictors 280–1; sentence fragments 73, 74, 76–7; sentence-integrated markers 81; set expressions 73, 74, 75; signalling device 42; SLDMs 73–81 German writers in English language: discourse markers 252–78; exemplifiers 255–7; reformulators 257–64; SLDMs 270–1 gerund clauses 80 Gil, A. 19, 39 Godin, H.J.G. 70–1 Grand Robert 285, 293 Granger, S. 245, 252–3, 253–4, 267 Grieve, J. 1, 18, 87,155,157, 160-1, 196, 198, 199, 204, 223, 239, 289–90, 291 Grundy, P. 109 Guerrier, B. 289 Gülich, E. 38, 111 Halliday, M.A.K. 5, 87 Hammerly, H. 247, 252 Harrap’s French Dictionary 293, 296 Hatim, B. 19, 22 Hausmann, F.J. 45–6, 47, 243, 302 henceforth 153–4, 192 Hengst, K. 19 Henschelmann, K. 248 hereafter 153–4, 192 hierfür 320 Hoey, M. 16–17 hortatives 68, 78, 119–20, 122 Houghton, D. 16–17 House, J. 126–7 Howarth, P.A. 8, 274, 282 Hunston, S. 5, 10, 47 Hutz, M. 85, 87, 108, 109 Hyland, K 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 303 hypertext links 320, 323 hypothesis markers 95–6 idiom principle ix, 6–7, 15, 46, 100–5, 277 idiomaticity 47–8, 58 i.e. 150–1, 177, 182–3, 191, 257, 261 if not l95, 197, 197–8 if not actually 200 if not all 201 if not indeed 199 if not more 201 if you prefer 205–6 if you will 205–6 illustration clauses 128–30 imperatives 118, 119, 120–3 in effect 229–30 in other words 188–91, 218, 229, 257–9, 261 in plain English 192–3 in Zahlen 172–3, 177 in Zahlen ausgedrückt 172–3 infer 236 inferrers 91, 92, 276; comparative 228–31; English 221–3; errors 273; French 223–6; German 226–8; Hyland 86; native/non-native writing 264–6; negated 222;

next page >

prepositional phrases 227; suggestive 219, 231–4, 238; two-element 219, 234–8, 237, 238; υerba dicendi 219–23, 228–31, 238; zero connector 239 infinitive clauses 59–60, 69, 79, 124–8, 139, 141 information retrieval 23 informers 95, 99, 102 intensifiers 253 interference 246–7, 252, 281–2 interlanguage analysis 245, 246–52 International Corpus of Learner English 267 Internet texts 28, 29–30 intuition 14, 37, 50–1, 86–7, 112–13, 126–7 it is clear 86 it transpires that 275–7

ja (sogar) 195–203, 198, 205–6 Jespersen, J. 63–4 Journal of Social Psychology 109 justement 166, 180, 183, 184 Kennedy, G. 7–8 Kotschi, T. 111 labelling discourse 49, 56 Labov, W. 37–8 langue/parole dichotomy 10 Legenhausen, L. 249 Lenk, U. 39–40, 41 Lewis, M. 243 lexico-grammars 6, 10, 104–5, 254 lexicography 283–90

< previous page

page_354

next page >

< previous page

page_355

Page 355 lexis/syntax 5–6, 10, 14 Lindner, C. 253 linkers 210–16, 217 Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English 284, 304 Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English 28 Lorenz, G. 253 Lozes, J. 11–12 Lozes, M. 11–12 McArthur, T. 309 man denke an 121 man sieht, dass 233 man sieht also, dass 229 Mann, Thomas v Mann, W.C. 19–21, 22, 88, 89, 92, 96, 116, 219 Marlowe, Christopher 22 Martin, R. 306, 307–8 Mason, I. 19, 22 meaning 6, 18, 39–41, 283–4 meaning 150–1 Meaning-Text Theory 324 Mel’čuk, I. 324 metadiscourse 83, 84, 86, 110, 328n4 metalanguage 29, 108–9, 299–305 Métrich, R. 17, 305, 306, 307–8 Meyer, P.G. 34 Microconcord 33 mind you 209 misconception 103–4 mit anderen Worten 167, 169, 177, 218, 229 model markers 95–6 Le Monde 40–1 monitor corpora 249 Moon, R. 52 more precisely 206, 207 most, if not all 200, 201 multi-word units ix, 3, 45–8, 243 Multiconcord Parallel Carpus 33, 281 Murat, M. 144, 146–7, 163, 177–8 Murray, J.A.H. 106

namely 150–2, 177–9, 183–5, 193, 257 nämlich 172, 177, 257 Nash, W. 109–10 native/non-native writers 252–3, 255–71, 264–6; see also German writers in English Nattinger, J.R. 39, 52–4 natural language strings 45 newspaper texts 11–12, 23, 25 not so 318 not surprisingly 266 not to say 195, 197 notamment 183, 184 noun phrases 236–8. 123–124 nouns, abstract 58, 79–80, 236–8 nous disons bien 209 nucleus—satellite relations 19, 20, 21, 89, 115, 219 Oakey, D.J. 3 occurrence: see frequency counts oder anders 169 oder besser gesagt 203–5 oder gar 199 oder (so)gar mehr 201 oft-cited 134 Oldenburg, H. 19, 22 on aura alors 233 on comprend que 233 on écrira alors 233–4 on sait que 294–5 on suppose que 299 on υoit que 233 open-choice principle 14–15, 277 or 154–5, 186, 194, 319 or/and indeed 199, 261 or eυen 198, 199, 202

next page >

(or) even 195–203 or even more 201 or rather 203–5, 261 oral discourse markers 4, 38–9, 44–5 Östman, J.-O. 44 ou 166–7, 193 ou plutôt 203-5 Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary 284 Oxford English Dictionary CD-ROM 284, 310, 320 Oxford Hachette French Dictionary 288 Paquette, A. 278–9, 289, 290 parallel corpus 23, 30–3, 106, 141 participial clauses 59, 60, 80, 187 passive mood 267 persuade 249–50 Petermann, J. 297–8 philosophy journals 279 phonetics 299 phraseology viii–ix, 7, 45–50, 243, 305–6 plus exactement appelé 206–8 plus précisément 206, 207

< previous page

page_355

next page >

< previous page Page 356 plus simplement appelé 193 pour faire court 165 pour le moins…sinon 202 pour mieux dire 205 pour ne pas dire 195, 197 prenons 121 prepositional phrases 71, 227 pronoun, demonstrative 320 prototype theory 99 Proust, Marcel 199 punctuation 124, 178, 185, 191

que dis-je 205 question markers 94 Quirk, R. viii, 59, 61, 142, 143–4, 272 quotation 306 recapitulators 210–12 reference, dangling 281 reference CD-ROMs 23, 26 referrers 97, 99 reformulators 4, 97–8, 141–4; appositives 164; collocations 200; English 147–55, 156, 177–94; French 155–67, 168, 177–94; frequency 259, 260, 262, 263; German 167–76; German writers in English 257–64; gradational 195–208, 218; intensional/extensional 146, 148, 149–52, 218; lexicalized 264; pure 144–55; repetitional 208–19; triangulation 111; υoire 101 relative clauses 71, 174 reservation 279 restatement relations 95, 96, 114–15 restaters 208–10 rseter 296 restriction 324 restrictors 97, 100, 101, 280–1 resumers 97–8, 141–3 rhetoric 103, 104–5, 112–18, 260, 326 Rhetorical Structure Theory 19–21; evidence relation 116; exemplification 112–13; non-volitional cause relation 92; reformulators 147; SLDMs 86, 88; volitional/non-volitional 219; see also nucleus-satellite relations Risselada, R. 43–4 Robert Collins Senior Dictionary 288 Le Robert 288 Roehner, B. 278–9, 289, 290 Roulet, E. 34–5, 115 Rousseau, Jean-Jacques 82 Russian linguistics viii, 47–8

sagen 226–7 sample entries, dictionaries 310–20 sampling 9 sans+infinitive 105 Saussure, Ferdinand de 10 Schemann, S. 303, 305, 307 Schiffrin, D. 39, 44 second-level discourse markers ix, 4, 52; alphabetical ordering of 292, 297–8; dictionaries 283–5, 286, 308–9, 320–4; English 54–62; errors 272, 302; first-level discourse markers 100; foreign language teaching 271, 325–6; French 62–73, 239; frequency counts 51, 106–7, 111;

page_356

next page >

German 73–81; German writers in English 270–1; idiom principle 100–5; lexical dependencies 100–1; lexicography 283–90; multi-functional 299, 300–1; multiple category membership 98–100; obsolescent 304; one-word connectives 82; oral 325; Rhetorical Structure Theory 88; selection and classification 292; syntax 52–4; taxonomy 87–98; translation corpus 278–9; typographic style 298; see also multi-word units semantics 6, 300–2 sentence fragments 55, 56–61, 64, 65–72, 73, 74, 76–7, 213 sentence-integrated markers 64, 72–3, 81 set expressions: English 54, 55, 56; French 63–5; German 73, 74, 75 si je puis dire 205–6 si l’on peut dire 205–6 si l’on υeut 205–6 Siepmann, D. 3, 8, 46, 49, 95, 97, 100, 280, 309, 325 siglé (en) 165 signalisieren 228 signalling devices 38, 42 Sinclair, J.M. ix, 5, 6–7, 10, 28, 46, 101, 283–4, 300, 301, 307 Sinhaneti, K. 109 sinon 195–203, 198 sinon même 200 sinon plus 201 social psychology texts 108–9 sogar 200

< previous page

page_356

next page >

< previous page

page_357

Page 357 soit 163–4, 177, 189, 190–1, 194, 296 solutionhood relation 94 speech acts 34, 303 Speight, S. 249, 253 spelling errors 248 Spooren, W. 43–4 sports science texts 108 sprich 173 Stolze, R. 108 Stubbs, M. 5, 30 style labels 303 subordinate clauses 139, 140, 213 substitution 48 suggestors 95, 96, 238 summarizers 91 surprisingly 87 Swales, J.M. 87 Swan, M. 253 syntax 5–6, 10, 43, 52–4 Tadros, A. 211 take exemplifier 107, 121 Tamba, I. 167 taxonomy 3–4, 26–7, 87–98 Tesnière, L. 272 texts: academic 6–7, 23, 26–30; analysis 33; categorization by subject 28–9; empiricist 5; language functions 82–7; quality 245; student/professional 254, 263 that -clause 185 that is: and c’est-à-dire 177–88; en d’autres termes 180; et plus exactement 180; intensional/extensional 179; justement 180; namely 179; over-represented 260–1; reformulator 144–7, 149–50, 257; zero connector 218 this implies that 230 this means 229 this would give us 233 Thompson, S.A. 19–21, 22, 88, 89, 92, 96, 116, 219 to wit 150–1, 177 topic initiators 93, 99, 100, 101, 102 traduisez 166, 194 translation corpus 23, 30–3, 278–9 translation studies 7, 10, 11; errors 248–9; procedural knowledge 12, 14; quality 31; website example 13 triangulation method 111 Trier, J. 6 Trumpp, E.C. 108

um nicht zu sagen 195, 197 un autre point est que 278–9 Uniυersalis CD-ROM 26 valency 272–4 Van Dijk, T. viii Vande Kopple, W.J. 83, 85 Vann, R.J. 248 verb, copular 79–80 υerba dicendi: inferrers 219–23, 228–31, 238 verbless clauses 59, 69, 80 υieles spricht dafür 288 Vinay, J.-P. 108, 110, 239 υiz. 150–2 vocabulary acquisition 329n1

vocabulary books 288–90, 309–10 υoir 214, 236 υoire 195–6, 197–8, 199, 200, 202, 203 υoire…tout court 202 υoire carrément 200 υoire daυantage 201 υoire même 200 υoire simplement 202 υom gleichen Schlag sein 303

we may notice that 270 Weiner, E. 38 Weinrich, Harald v wenn man so will 205–6 wenn nicht (gar) 195–203, 197, 198 wenn nicht sogar 200 wiederum 209–10 Wilss, W. 10, 327n4 with 59 with this in mind 318, 321 wohlgemerkt 209 word associations 6–7, 45 word of caution 280 WordSmith Concordancer 33 Wort des Herrn 280 zeigen 228 zero connectors: à saυoir 187–8; c’est-à-dire 186; exemplification 113; French 194; inferrers 239; namely 184; in other words 190; that is 218 zumindest…wenn nicht 202

< previous page

page_357