Contrastive-textology-and-corpus-linguisticsle

'~~PergamonLanguageSciences,Vol.18,Nos3-4,pp.947-957,1996Copyright,~,1996ElsevierScienceLtdPrintedinGreatBritain.Allrightsreserved0388-0001/96$15.00+0.00S0388-0001(96)00056-3CONTRASTI~TEXTOLOGYANDCORPUSLINGUISTICSONTHEVALUEOFPARALLELTEXTSR.R.K.HARTMANNDepartmentofAppliedLinguistics,UniversityofExeter,Exeter,DevonEX44QH,U.K.ABSTRACTThepapersketchesthedevelopmentfromcontrastivelexicologytocontrastivetextology,distinguishesanumberofdifferemtypesof'paralleltexts',showshowcomputer-assistedcorpuslinguisticsiscomingtogripswithtexttypologicalissues,andmentionssomeapplications.KEYWORDSContrastivelinguistics;textlinguistics;paralleltexts;corpuslinguistics;translation.CONTRASTIVETEXTOLOGYSincetheearly1970's,andindeedbeforethatinafewpioneeringstudies,linguistshavebeencuriousabouthowthewordsofanypairoflanguagescanbecontrasted,howtheirmeaningscanbeanalysedintermsofsemanticconstituents,howtheyarecodifiedindictionaries,andhowtheirtranslationequivalentsarediscoveredandmanaged.Thisisthesubjectof'comrastivelexicology'towhichIhavemadeanumberofcontributions(cf.Hartmann1976).JudgingbythetopicsofseveralpaperspresentedattheBrightonConferenceinContrastiveSemanticsandPragmatics,thistraditionisstillalivetoday.947948R.R.K.ttARTMANNHowever,manyofushavebeenfrustratedbythecomplexitiesanddisillusionedbythelimitationsofcontrastivelexicalstudies.Whatbotheredme,asearlyasthemid-1970's,wasthestaticnatureofthesecomparisons;anotherworrywasthefactthattheydidnotseemtotakeintoaccounttherealitiesoftextualdiscourse.ThenIhadthechance,duringafour-monthfellowshipinAustralia,toexploresomethingthatwasverymuchintheairinthelate1970'sbutno-onehadputalabeltoityetIcalledit'contrastivetextology'andsawitasthenecessarycombinationandintegrationofcontrastiveanalysisanddiscourseanalysis.Iarguedthatcontrastivestatementsonlymadesenseiftheywerebasedontheanalysisof'paralleltexts',examplesofdiscoursefromcorrespondinggenresofapair(anypair)oflanguages.OneexcitingsetofdocumentsIfoundattheAustralianNationalLibraryinCanberrawasthecompletegenesisofthetranslationofoneofthiscentury'sclassics:ErichMafiaRemarque'sbookImWestenmchtsNeuesbytheAustralianArthurWesleyWheen(AllQuietontheWesternFront),fromthefirsthand-writtendrattandcorrectedtypescriptfightthroughtothecorrectedproofsofthebook(of.Hartmann1981).HereIhadparalleltextswhichalsoillustratedtheapproximativenatureofthetranslationprocessandhadthevariouscontrastsembeddedintheirnaturalcontextofdiscourse.Unfortunately,Ididnotexploittheempiricalandtheoreticalimplicationsofthiscontrastivetextlinguisticstothefullbecause1becamedistractedbyoveradecadeofnewexcitements,viz.thedevelopmentoflexicographyasanacademicdisciplineatExeterandelsewhere.However,lastyearIpaidanothervisittoAustraliawherearesearchfellowshipatMacquarieUniversitygavemethechancetocontinuemyexplorationsofthenotionofparalleltexts,thistimeinthefightofrecentworkincorpuslinguistics,artificialintelligenceandbilinguallexicography.Withthehelpofatable(Fig.1)Ishouldliketointroducethistopicherebyclarifyingsomebasicmeaningrelations.SemioticdimensionsLinguisticlevelsAnalytical'methodsLexicographictreatmentinwordsparadigmaticlexicoiogydistinctivefeatures/semanticcomponents.definitions/equivalentsinsentencessyntagmaticgrammarcollocationsexamplesintextspragmaticdiscourseanalysisconcordancescitation'sFig.1.MeaningrelationsCONTRASTIVETEXTOLOGYANDCORPUSLINGUISTICS949Thefirstdistinctionwecanmakeisthatbetweenmeaninginwords,meaninginsentences,andmeaningintexts,whichgivesusthreecolumns.'Meaninginwords'istheaimoftheconventionaldefinition,andthejoboftraditionallexieology,semanticsandlexicography.Butre~entworkinsyntaxandtextlinguisticshasconvincedmanyofusthatmeaningrelationsalsoexistinsentencesandtexts.Asimilarthree-folddistinctionisthatintolinguisticlevels,suchaslexicology,grammar,anddiscourseanalysis,althougheachhasitsowntraditionsandpeculiarities.Lexicology,orthelinguisticstudyofvocabularyitems(includinglexicalsemantics),isofgreatestinteresthere,butgrammaranddiscoursemustnotbeneglected.Turningbrieflytotheanalyticalmethodsthatmaybeappropriatetodescribemeaningateachoftheselevels,wehaveabewilderingarrayofmodelsandtechniquestochoosefrom.InFig.1,Ijustmentionthree:firstly,theanalysisofwordsasmembersoflexicalfieldssharingcertainsemantic'features'or'components'.Thisworkswellforfairlytightlyorganisedsetslikekinshiptermsortaxonomicdomainslikeverbsofmotion,butbecomesverydifficultandevenarbitrarywithlessobviouslystructurednotionssuchasabstractnounslikebeautyordemocracy.Secondly,theanalysisofmulti-wordphrasessuchas'idioms'and'collocations'.Thirdly,theanalysisofwordsintexts,whichcanbefacilitatedbycomputertextcorpora,withthemateriallaidoutinso-called'conc,ordanccs'.Thebottomlineinthetablesummarisesthreewaysinwhichmeaningistreatedindictionaries,althoughagainthisisnotanexhaustivelist.Thus,definitionsarethemostimportantandbest-knowndeviceforexplainingthemeaningsofindividualwords,butitisbynomeanstheonlyexplanatorytechniqueavailabletolexicographers.Meaningsofwordsinsentencesarehandledlargelybyexamples,wordsintextsbyv