File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Translations as evidence for semantics: An illustration

TitleTranslations as evidence for semantics: An illustration
Authors
Issue Date2003
PublisherMouton de Gruyter. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.degruyter.de/journals/linguistics
Citation
Linguistics, 2003, v. 41 n. 4, p. 757-785 How to Cite?
AbstractThough a corpus-based linguistics is potentially more empirical than the intuition-based kind, the mere use of a corpus does not guarantee empiricalness. A monolingual corpus is good for counting forms but it does not readily reveal their meanings. Since meanings are not directly observable, the monolingual corpus can only provide circumstantial evidence for them. Their (psychological) reality, however, can only be established through informant testing. But then, few linguists have the facilities to do more than pay lip-service to the use of informants. The translation corpus could provide a way out of the crisis, since translators, through the linguistic choices they make, inadvertently supply evidence of the meanings of the forms they are receiving and producing. The paper illustrates this by showing how data from a translation corpus can complement evidence from a monolingual corpus to prove that English forms like BE said to, BE considered to, BE reported to, etc., are turning into evidential auxiliaries.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/143982
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 0.763
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.496
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorNoël, Den_HK
dc.date.accessioned2012-01-03T04:44:27Z-
dc.date.available2012-01-03T04:44:27Z-
dc.date.issued2003en_HK
dc.identifier.citationLinguistics, 2003, v. 41 n. 4, p. 757-785en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0024-3949en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/143982-
dc.description.abstractThough a corpus-based linguistics is potentially more empirical than the intuition-based kind, the mere use of a corpus does not guarantee empiricalness. A monolingual corpus is good for counting forms but it does not readily reveal their meanings. Since meanings are not directly observable, the monolingual corpus can only provide circumstantial evidence for them. Their (psychological) reality, however, can only be established through informant testing. But then, few linguists have the facilities to do more than pay lip-service to the use of informants. The translation corpus could provide a way out of the crisis, since translators, through the linguistic choices they make, inadvertently supply evidence of the meanings of the forms they are receiving and producing. The paper illustrates this by showing how data from a translation corpus can complement evidence from a monolingual corpus to prove that English forms like BE said to, BE considered to, BE reported to, etc., are turning into evidential auxiliaries.en_HK
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherMouton de Gruyter. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.degruyter.de/journals/linguisticsen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofLinguisticsen_HK
dc.titleTranslations as evidence for semantics: An illustrationen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.emailNoël, D: dnoel@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityNoël, D=rp01170en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1515/ling.2003.024en_US
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0041376547en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0041376547&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume41en_HK
dc.identifier.issue4en_HK
dc.identifier.spage757en_HK
dc.identifier.epage785en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000184392800005-
dc.publisher.placeGermanyen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridNoël, D=26631968500en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats