Article

"Contrastive Linguistics, Translation, and Parallel Corpora"

Jarle Ebeling
Meta : journal des traducteurs / Meta: Translators' Journal, vol. 43, n° 4, 1998, p. 602-615.

Pour citer cet article, utiliser l'information suivante :

URI: http://id.erudit.org/iderudit/002692ar

DOI: 10.7202/002692ar

Note : les règles d'écriture des références bibliographiques peuvent varier selon les différents domaines du savoir.

Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d'auteur. L'utilisation des services d'Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique

d'utilisation que vous pouvez consulter à l'URI http://www.erudit.org/apropos/utilisation.html

Érudit est un consortium interuniversitaire sans but lucratif composé de l'Université de Montréal, l'Université Laval et l'Université du Québec à
Montréal. Il a pour mission la promotion et la valorisation de la recherche. Érudit offre des services d'édition numérique de documents

scientifiques depuis 1998.

Pour communiquer avec les responsables d'Érudit : [email protected]

Document téléchargé le 22 février 2014 02:03

 CONTRASTIVE LINGUISTICS,
TRANSLATION, AND PARALLEL
CORPORA
JARLE EBELING
University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

Meta , XLIII, 4, 1 998

Résumé
Cet article traite des corpus parallèles comme source utile de données pour l'étude des
différences et similarités entre des langues. La notion d'équivalence traductionnelle sert de
méthodologie pour l'analyse contrastive. À partir d'un corpus parallèle bidirectionnel de textes
norvégiens et anglais, on examine le comportement des constructions présentatives anglaises
(there) et celui des constructions équivalentes norvégiennes (det) dans des textes en anglais et
en norvégien tant originaux que traduits.

Abstract
This paper regards parallel corpora as suitable sources of data for investigating the dif-
ferences and similarities between languages, and adopts the notion of translation equivalence
as a methodology for contrastive analysis. It uses a bidirectional parallel corpus of Norwegian
and English texts to examine the behaviour of presentative English there-constructions as well
as the Norwegian equivalent det-constructions in original and translated English, and original
and translated Norwegian respectively.

1. INTRODUCTION
The headache of any contrastive study has been finding the so-called tertium com-
parationis (TC), that is, the common ground on which two languages can be compared
to be able to establish (dis)similarities. In James (1980), translation equivalence is seen
as the best TC for contrastive analysis. James sees translational equivalence in light of
Halliday's (e.g. 1994) three metafunctions of language, and writes: “For two sentences
from different languages to be translationally equivalent they must convey the same ide-
ational and interpersonal and textual meanings” (James 1980: 178).1 The present article
looks at translations to see what they can tell us about the differences and similarities
between English and Norwegian. We shall concentrate on a structure found in both lan-
guages, and which fulfills the formal criteria of being interpreted as equivalent. There
are, however, differences with regard to the frequency with which certain verbs and verb
forms occur in the structure, and this affects the translation of it.
To investigate the structure we shall use a parallel corpus of English and Norwe-
gian with translations in both directions.

2. ENGLISH AND NORWEGIAN

English and Norwegian are closely related languages. They have a common root,
Germanic, and there has been considerable contact between the language communities
over the years. It is debatable whether the two languages were mutually intelligible in the
Old English period, but there was considerable overlap both with regard to morphology,
Meta, XLIII, 4, 1998
2 Meta, XLIII, 4, 1998

lexis, and syntax. Even today, a Norwegian sentence like Der var en mann i båten should
be understandable to an English reader.2 Norwegian- and English-speaking learners also
have relatively little trouble acquiring each other's languages.
Since the two languages have a common ancestry, they have structures which are
similar both with regard to form and function. One such construction is the existential
there-construction or the presentative det-construction in Norwegian, with there and det
as a dummy subject.3
(1) There is a waiting room along the hall
Det er et venterom borte i gangen

Both constructions will be referred to as presentative constructions (there-/det-

presentatives) to underline what I believe is their basic function, viz. to present new
information into the discourse. Even though the constructions have many features in
common, there are differences as well. In the present study, we shall focus on one such
difference, namely the use of verbs in these constructions.

3. PARALLEL CORPORA
Several new parallel corpora have been compiled over the last few years, many
with a basis in foreign language departments and institutions specialising in translation
studies.4 Both kinds of institutions have realised that, even though their ultimate aims
may not be exactly the same, they need parallel texts as a foundation for empirical
research. The fact that both camps can use the same data and the same tools shows the
usefulness of a parallel corpus.
To me a parallel corpus consists of at least two subcorpora which exhibit some kind
of parallelism. The parallelism can be (i) that the two subcorpora represent different lan-
guages or dialects with the same amount of data drawn from comparable sources; or (ii)
that they express the same content in different languages or dialects; or (iii) that the
same effect is aimed at using different languages or dialects (or even styles); or (iv) that
one subcorpus consists of original text, the other of translated text in the same language.
The texts of the corpus are generally of the same text type or drawn from similar genres.
If a comparison of the two subcorpora is aimed at, the same kind of design criteria
should be employed, i.e. equivalent sample sizes, samples from the same period, compa-
rable amounts of spoken and written language, etc.
The first type of corpus, which has been referred to as a multilingual corpus (Baker
1995), can be used for contrastive studies of different languages or dialects, e.g. British
English and American English, or to control for translationese in a translation corpus
(see the next type). The second type is called a parallel corpus in Baker (1995) and a
translation corpus in Schmied and Schäffler (1996). The most common variety seems to
be a corpus containing original texts in one language and their translations in a different
language, but one could also imagine two or more independent reports of the same event
in different languages, e.g. commentaries on a sports event broadcast live in several lan-
guages. The latter would then not be a translation corpus, but would still qualify as a par-
allel corpus. The third type of corpus would consist of collections of texts which have the
same purpose or aim, but which do not express the same content in semantic terms. What
I have in mind are programs of political parties from different countries; speeches made
at comparable events, e.g. the opening of parliaments; etc. Such a corpus would be useful
to study the style and rhetoric of different languages. The last type of corpus consists of
original and translated texts in the same language, and has been referred to as a compara-
ble corpus by Baker (1995).
CONTRASTIVE LINGUISTICS, TRANSLATION, AND PARALLEL CORPORA 3

The English-Norwegian Parallel Corpus incorporates three of the four types of par-
allel corpus.5 It is a translation corpus with original texts and their translations (English-
Norwegian and Norwegian-English); it can be used as a comparable corpus to study gen-
eral features of translation (Baker 1993); and it can be used as a multilingual corpus for
contrastive studies of English and Norwegian as well as to control for translationese 6 in
the translated parts of the corpus. I shall focus on the translation corpus, and study the
translation of what appear to be equivalent constructions in the two languages.

4. THE MATERIAL

The material investigated, taken from the English-Norwegian Parallel Corpus

(ENPC), consists of approximately 0.5 million words of original text in each language,
where 70% is from fiction and 30% is from non-fiction. The amount of translated text is
roughly the same, 0.5 million words for each language. The material is made up of
extracts from books, between 10,000 and 15,000 words from the beginning of each book.
All in all there are 40 extracts from English books and 39 from Norwegian (see Appen-
dix). In most cases, there is only one text per author, but one English writer is represented
by two text extracts and three of the Norwegian writers are represented by two extracts
each.
Not much is known about the translators. What we do know is that all the fiction
material has been published by reputable publishers, and we have no reason to believe
that they did not employ professional translators. Even though some of the translators
have translated more than one text, there is a fairly good spread among the translators; 17
different translators have been involved in translating the 26 Norwegian fiction texts into
English. The number is even higher in the other direction: 21 different translators are
responsible for translating the 26 English novels. When it comes to the non-fiction mate-
rial, we know very little because the translations have been done by institutions (e.g. the
Foreign Office), and the information is lacking in the publications.
All quotations taken from the material are followed by a text code and sentence ref-
erence. For example AT1.3.s159 means Anne Tyler (author), text number 1, chapter 3, s-
unit number 159. An s-unit is roughly the same as an orthographic sentence. A capital T
after the text number shows that it is a translation. Where necessary or appropriate, I have
included a (literal) translation of my own. I have, however, disregarded the systematic
difference in subject-verb inversion between the languages. For example, when Norwe-
gian has I dag kommer det en hest, it has been translated as Today there comes a horse, and
not word-by-word as Today comes there a horse.

5. VERBS IN PRESENTATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS

5.1. English Verbs

Apart from be, the verbs occurring in English there-sentences “must be intransitive
[...], and of fairly general presentative meaning: verbs of motion (arrive, enter, pass, come,
etc.), of inception (emerge, spring up, etc.), and of stance (live, remain, stand, lie, etc.)”
according to Quirk et al. (1985: 1408). Transitive verbs are rare in active form in there-
constructions, follow and enter being notable exceptions. Transitive verbs in the passive
are almost non-existent, and where aspectual forms like the perfective and the progressive
occur, they come after the postverbal noun phrase (the notional subject), and the con-
struction can be seen as a special type of there be existential (Quirk et al. 1985: 1409, Note
a).7 It has also been noted that verbs of disappearance (die, disappear, lack, vanish) rarely
4 Meta, XLIII, 4, 1998

occur in English existential there-constructions. All this shows that the classes of verbs
that can appear are very limited.
Levin (1993) presents an impressive list of verbs attested in English there-construc-
tions (more than 250), but says nothing about the frequency of the various verbs. In the
original English texts of the ENPC, only fifteen different verbs are attested, and be
accounts for 98% of the instances. The only other verbs occurring more than once are
come, follow, remain, and pass. This suggests that be is now almost the only verb occurring
in English there-constructions, at least in the text types and genres covered by the corpus.
Example 2 is a typical instance.
(2) There was a girl on a stool behind the counter, a waifish little person in a halter top.
(AT1.3.s159)

The total number of English there-constructions in the original texts is 1214. Of

these, 1193 are there be-presentatives.

5.2. Norwegian Verbs

For Norwegian, the situation is quite different. Norwegian allows a wider set of
verbs, and verbs in the passive are permissible. Transitive verbs in the active voice are rare
though (but see example 4). We can also notice that Norwegian has several verbs whose
meaning is very close to be (Norw. "være").8 The most frequent one is finnes which has no
direct English equivalent, but which is regarded as the existential verb par excellence in
Norwegian; and det finnes ("there is") often corresponds to French il y a, German es gibt,
or Spanish hay.9 Despite the many verbs meaning "being in existence," they only account
for 57% of the total Norwegian material. Examples 3 - 6 show Norwegian det-construc-
tions with verbs other than være ("be") where the literal translations sound awkward or are
unacceptable.
(3) ..., og det bodde litt over førti mennesker i dalen. (SH1.1.1.s62)
...; about forty people lived in the valley. (SH1T.1.1.s61)
Lit.: ..., and there lived a little over forty people in the valley
(4) Det lukter kommende høst. (CL1.1.3.11.s44)
There's the smell of the coming autumn. (CL1T.1.3.11.s44)
Lit.: There smells coming autumn
(5) ..., og mellom dem slynget det seg underlige draker og fabeldyr. (TTH1.1.s207)
..., and between them twined dragons and fantasy animals. (TTH1T.1.s215)
Lit.: ..., and between them there twined themselves strange dragons and fable animals
(6) ... at det var blitt begått et mord like i nærheten. (FC1.2.s133)
... that a murder had been committed right there in his neighbourhood.
(FC1T.2.s129)
Lit.: ... that there had been committed a murder close in the vicinity

The most frequent Norwegian verbs in the original texts (more than 10 occur-
rences), disregarding those with a meaning close to "being in existence" and være ("be")
itself, are: bli ("become"), bo ("live"), gjelde ("concern"), gjøre ("do"), gå ("go/walk"),
hende ("happen"), henge ("hang"), komme ("come"), ligge ("lie"), lukte ("smell"), oppstå
("arise"), sitte ("sit"), skje ("happen"), stå ("stand"), velge ("elect"). Most of the verbs lie
within the semantic range covered by verbs found in English as well, i.e. verbs of motion,
inception, or stance. Velge ("elect") is only found in the passive as in 7.
Norwegian has no problem in allowing verbs of disappearance, and reflexive verbs
are quite common (see ex. 5). Norwegian can even accept agentive verbs like arbeide
("work"), spise ("eat"), and handle ("shop") according to Norwegian grammars (e.g.
CONTRASTIVE LINGUISTICS, TRANSLATION, AND PARALLEL CORPORA 5

(7) På høsten ble det valgt nye verneombud, og arbeidsmiljøutvalg blir etablert tidlig i 1994.
(NFRA1.3.13.s21)
In autumn, new safety deputies were elected, and occupational environment
committees will be formed early in 1994. (NFRA1T.3.13.s21)
Lit.: In the autumn, there were elected new safety deputies...
Faarlund et al. 1997). No instances of verbs of the latter category are found in my mate-
rial.
The total number of Norwegian det-constructions in the original texts is 2076, i.e.
much higher than the number of there-constructions in the English material.

6. TRANSLATIONESE
We started out by quoting James' (1980) rather rigorous definition of translation
equivalence as the best tertium comparationis for contrastive analysis. After looking at
grammars of the two languages and evidence from the corpus, we find that there are dif-
ferences with regard to the frequency of certain classes of verbs as well as of certain verb
forms in the two constructions. How does this affect the translation of there-/det-con-
structions into the other language? If the constructions are equivalent, one would expect
there-constructions to be translated by det-constructions, and vice versa. But if we want
to avoid translationese, that is, “deviance in translated texts induced by the source lan-
guage” (Johansson and Hofland 1994: 26), we will, on many occasions, have to choose a
different verb or verb form in the translation. This is the kind of translationese Schmied
and Schäffler (1996: 45-6) call deviations from the target norm. Deviations from the
norm are different from language or system error which they refer to as deviations from
the target system (p. 45). The latter is what has traditionally been termed translationese
(see Newmark 1988: 285 and Baker 1993: 249, Note 5). As an instance of a deviation
from a target norm, Schmied and Schäffler present an example where an English nomi-
nalisation is translated by a German verbal structure. This would be a deviation they say
“if we assume that German, as a norm, has greater tendency towards nominalisations
than English” (p. 46). In the same fashion, one could argue that a translation of a Nor-
wegian det-construction with the verb stå ("stand") by an English there-construction
with stand, and not be, would be a deviation from the norm and not the system. English,
we have seen, tolerates intransitive verbs of stance in there-constructions, and the verb is
listed in Levin (1993: 89) as a verb of spatial configuration attested in there-construc-
tions. Hence, it would not be a system error. It would also be a deviation from the norm
if English there be-constructions were always translated by det være-constructions, since
only about 50% of Norwegian det-presentatives have være ("be") as the main verb.
If translators wanted to be as true to the target language norm as possible, they
would, it seems, translate Norwegian lexical verbs with English be and vice versa.10 This,
however, would lead to what I call despecification and specification, respectively.
Despecification means loss of semantic (ideational) or pragmatic (textual) infor-
mation. If a semantically richer verb (than be) is translated by be, semantic information
is lost; when a Norwegian det-construction with the verb in the passive is translated by
an English construction in which the postverbal noun phrase (the grammatical object)
of the Norwegian original ends up in preverbal (subject position) in the English transla-
tion, textual information is lost. In example 6 above, the postverbal NP et mord ("a mur-
der") of the original is the subject of the English translation and is in preverbal position.
In this case, we have a loss of textual information since both languages, in most situa-
tions, try to adhere to the principle of end-focus (Quirk et al. 1985: 1357). This principle
states that there is a tendency for new information to come late in the clause.
6 Meta, XLIII, 4, 1998

Specification, which means adding information, occurs when an English there be-
construction is translated by a Norwegian det-construction with a semantically richer
verb, as in 8.
(8) There were two bar stools at the counter and ... (SG1.2.s147)
Det stod to krakker ved kjøkkendisken. (SG1T.2.s145)
Lit.: There stood two stools at the kitchen counter

Depending on the type of verb and the direction we translate in, we can now set up
the following hypotheses about Norwegian-English and English-Norwegian translation
of presentative constructions.

obligatory despecification
Norwegian det-constructions must be translated into English there be-
with lexical verbs constructions or non-there-
constructions
obligatory despecification
Norwegian det-constructions must be translated into English constructions with
with the verb in the passive the verb in the active, or
passive constructions
without the dummy subject
there
optional specification
English there-constructions can be translated into Norwegian det-
With be as the main verb constructions
with lexical verbs

Table 1
Obligatory and optional (de)specification

In general, (de)specification can either be obligatory or optional. In the case of

optional (de)specification, the translator is free to choose between a construction which
is formally and semantically equivalent to the source, and a construction where infor-
mation is added or lost. That is, the system of the target language does not put the same
kind of constraint on the construction as the source language does.
To resolve the dilemma of either deviating from the norm or losing or adding
information, we can of course select a completely different construction. But if this hap-
pened in a sufficient number of cases, the there-/det-constructions would presumably
not be translationally equivalent, and hence not similar in a contrastive perspective.
I should stress that I have made no attempt to look at a wider context to see if the
information added or lost can be found outside the sentence translated, or can be recov-
ered by social or cultural knowledge or logical inference. The latter, to my mind, lies
outside the scope of contrastive linguistics, at least at the level of syntax.
The next section looks at the translation of English there be-constructions into
Norwegian, and the translation of two Norwegian det-constructions into English, one
with verbs in the active voice, the other with verbs in the passive voice, with a view to
assessing the extent to which the hypotheses are confirmed.
CONTRASTIVE LINGUISTICS, TRANSLATION, AND PARALLEL CORPORA 7

7.1. Translation of English there be-presentatives

Of the total 1193 there be-presentatives in the English material, 786 (66%) have
been translated by a corresponding Norwegian det-construction with a verb denoting
existence only. Of the remaining 407 tokens, only 97 are translated by a det-construction
with another verb in the active. The most frequent are inchoative bli ("become"),
komme, ("come"), ligge, ("lie"), and stå ("stand"). Table 2 summarizes the findings.

bli 33
komme 16
ligge 10
stå 13
others 25
Total 97

Table 2
Lexical verbs in Norwegian translations of English there be-constructions

In subsection 5.2, we saw that Norwegian verbs of existence accounted for 57% of
all occurrences in the original material. The other 43% contained other verbs. The fig-
ures for verbs of existence vs. other active verbs in translated det-constructions (786+97)
are 89% and 11%. This then seems to be a case of translationese, that is, over-use of
verbs of existence in translated Norwegian text.11
What is perhaps more interesting is to see what other constructions are used to
translate English there be-constructions. The have-existential device (Quirk et al. 1985:
1411) is the most frequent (61 instances), followed by locative inversion (26 instances),
and det-presentatives with the verb in the passive (10 instances). Examples 9 to 11 show
the three options.
(9) There's a long trip ahead. (ABR1.1.1.s92)
Du har en lang tur foran deg. (ABR1T.1.1.s91)
Lit.: You have a long trip ahead of you.

(10) There was a half-eaten chicken tikka in front of her and a half-drunk glass of white
wine. (JB1.3.s55)
Foran henne sto en halvspist tikka-kylling og et halvt glass hvitvin. (JB1T.3.s55)
Lit.: In front of her stood a half-eaten chicken tikka and a half glass white wine

(11) There was a scuffling sound at the door behind her. (AT1.3.s615)
Det hørtes en tassende lyd ved døren bak henne. (AT1T.3.s617)
Lit.: There was heard a scuffling sound at the door behind her

The rest, 213 instances, consist of various constructions where the entity intro-
duced by the postverbal NP of the English original is integrated in the verb of the trans-
lation, as in example 12, or where the meaning of the there-construction is
incorporated somehow into a larger structure as in example 13. Among the 213
instances, we also find verbless structures and instances where the construction in ques-
tion is not translated at all.
8 Meta, XLIII, 4, 1998

(12) Or they can postpone it and decide to wait; there is no hurry, they have time, a
lifetime. (ABR1.1.1.s917)
Eller de kan utsette det og bestemme seg for å vente; det haster ikke, de har tid, et liv.
(ABR1T.1.1.s919)
Tran.: Or they can postpone it and decide to wait; it isn't urgent, they have time, a life

(13) Tubular neon in cursive script decorates the restored brick façades, and there's a lot
of brass trim, a lot of real estate, a lot of money. (MA1.1.2.s135)
Neon i skråskrift pryder nå de restaurerte murfasadene, som strutter av messingpynt og
eiendomsutvikling og penger. (MA1T.1.2.s140)
Lit.: Neon in cursive script decorates now the restored brick façades, which
protrude of brass trim and real estate development and money
On the basis of the quantitative information from the translations, we can set up a
tentative equivalence hierarchy which shows the closest Norwegian equivalents of the
English there be-construction.
A det-constructions with verbs of existence
B det-constructions with other verbs in the active voice
C have-existentials
D locative inversion
E det-constructions with verbs in the passive voice
F other constructions

In spite of the tendency to choose a verb of existence when the English original has
be, there is a sufficient number of instances of other verbs in the translations to claim that
Norwegian has the option of specification in the translation of det-constructions. Have-
existentials and det-constructions with the verb in the passive can also be said to add
information. In the have-existential construction, an agentive or affected subject role is
added, and with verbs in the passive an agent is also often implied. In both constructions
the new information comes towards the end of the clause as it does in there-presentatives,
so little textual information is lost. Locative inversion can be seen as informationally
equivalent to a there-presentative as well, since it uses inversion to place the new informa-
tion, i.e. the subject, late in the clause.

7.2 Translation of Norwegian det-constructions with Lexical Verbs

Of the total 2076 Norwegian det-constructions in the material, 1183 contain a verb
of existence (i.e. finnes, foreligge, etc.).
Of the remaining 893 instances, 235 contain passive det-constructions; we shall
come back to these in section 7.3. This leaves us with 658 active det-constructions with
semantically richer verbs. Of these only 181 (27%) are translated by an English there be-
construction and 4 (0.6%) by there + lexical verb. The remaining 473 instances (72%)
are translated by other constructions. See Table 3.
The Norwegian det-presentatives with semantically richer verbs, which have been
translated by English there-presentatives, fall into two main groups. The larger one has
some kind of there be-construction; the smaller one, only a handful of instances in my
material, has there together with a lexical verb. The first group can be divided into sev-
eral subgroups. The largest has simply there be + NP, where the semantic component
specifying inception, stance, etc. of the Norwegian original verb is lost. The most com-
mon Norwegian verbs in this category include bli ("become"), bo ("live"), gå ("go/walk"),
komme ("come"), ligge ("lie"), skje ("happen"), and stå ("stand"). All these are prototypi-
cal verbs of existence or appearance, and it has been claimed, for verbs of existence at
CONTRASTIVE LINGUISTICS, TRANSLATION, AND PARALLEL CORPORA 9

det-constructions with lexical verbs in the active

(tran. by) there be-constructions 181 (27%)
(tran. by) there-constructions with verbs other than be 4 (0.6%)
(tran. by) other constructions 473 (72%)
Total 658

Table 3
Norwegian det-constructions with active verbs and their translations

least, that they are informationally light and that they “can often be replaced by the cop-
ula without a noticeable change in sentence meaning” (Levin and Rappaport Hovav
1995: 231). This may be the reason why they have fallen out of use in English, but I will
still claim that this leads to despecification when the above verbs are translated by the
English be, and that the despecification is due to the English norm which tolerates lexi-
cal verbs in there-presentatives only in certain contexts.
The English translator may choose a compensatory strategy to keep as much of the
semantic information of the Norwegian verb as possible. One way is to have an -ing form
after the NP, which is allowed by the English system. The -ing form is then often the
translational equivalent of the Norwegian verb. Below are two examples:
(14) - Nina sier det sitter en mann i treet. (THA1.58.s23)
"Nina says there is a man sitting in the tree." (THA1T.58.s23)
Lit.: Nina says there sits a man in the tree

(15) "Så har da heller ingen visst at det har hengt et mesterverk av en altertavle i kirken i
mange hundre år." (JW1.1.2.s216)
"So no one knew either that there had been a masterpiece hanging above the altar in
the church for hundreds of years." (JW1T.1.2.s213)
Lit.: ... that there has hung a masterpiece of an altarpiece in the church for several
hundred years

Another way to include the semantic information of the Norwegian lexical verb is
to introduce a complex postverbal NP where the first part corresponds to the meaning of
the original verb as in 16.
(16) I rekkehusene nedenfor kryr det av dagmammaer, unger og eldre, et evig tog til og fra
supermarkedet. (KF1.1.7.s32)
In the row houses down below there's a swarm of baby-sitters, kids and older
people, an eternal procession to and from the supermarket. (KF1T.1.7.s36)
Lit.: In the row houses down below there swarm with baby-sitters, kids, and old
people ...

To summarize thus far, we have seen that 27.6% (185 instances) of the Norwegian
det-presentatives with lexical verbs have been translated into English there-construc-
tions. Nearly all of these have some type of there be-construction which in many cases
leads to despecification compared to the Norwegian original. The despecification is not
obligatory, as we hypothesized, since English has ways of compensating by including
additional information in the postverbal part of the construction.
We shall now have a look at what happens in the majority of cases (72%),
namely where the Norwegian det-construction is not translated by an English there-
construction.
10 Meta, XLIII, 4, 1998

If the original det-construction has a semantically richer verb, most translators

seem to prefer to move the postverbal noun phrase into subject position and translate the
verb with the closest English equivalent. Since the postverbal NP of the original is
mostly indefinite, so is the subject of the English translation. In some cases, however, it
can be made definite, which makes it less marked from an informational point of view.
This option of moving the grammatical object in the Norwegian original to subject posi-
tion in the English translation is chosen in about half the cases. If the original has an
adverbial of place in initial position, locative inversion is sometimes preferred. The next
three examples illustrate the three options (indefinite subject, definite subject, and loca-
tive inversion).
(17) Plutselig kom det et rop fra huset. (THA1.17.s21)
Suddenly a shout came from the house. (THA1T.17.s22)
Lit.: Suddenly there came a shout from the house

(18) Han tidde først, men så kom det et svar. (THA1.74.s27)

He paused at first, but then the answer came. (THA1T.74.s27)
Tran.: He kept quite at first, but then there came an answer

(19) Og i pakken lå det et kort med en hilsen fra kardinalen. (JW1.1.1.s222)

And inside was a card bearing greetings from the Cardinal. (JW1T.1.1.s218)
Lit.: And in the package there lay a card with a greeting from the Cardinal

In quite a number of cases, approx. 20%, the original grammatical object is kept in
postverbal position, either as an object or as a subject complement. This requires the
introduction of a subject. The subject can be empty it, referential it, or some other pro-
noun, or a full noun phrase referring to a thing or person(s) from the context. Often a
change of verb is necessary to make the new structure acceptable, as in example 22.
(20) Forsøk å få jevnt med maling på mønsteret, ellers blir det bare søl. (BV1.1.s270)
"Try to spread the paint evenly over the pattern, or it'll just be a mess."
(BV1T.1.s266)
Lit.: Try to get even with paint on the pattern, or else there becomes only mess

(21) Det mangler bare geitfjøs og løe før anlegget er komplett. (AOH1.5.1.7.s3)
The farm lacks only a goatshed and a barn. (AOH1T.5.1.7.s3)
Lit.: There lack only goatshed and barn before the place is complete

(22) Ut fra alt hun hørte vokste det frem en slags vemmelig erkjennelse at mamma også var
en del av den. (HW1.6.s46)
From everything she heard, she had a sickening feeling that Mama was also a part of
it. (HW1T.6.s46)
Lit.: Out from everything she heard there grew forth a kind of sickening realisation
that mama too was a part of it

In the remaining cases, the translator has either used various constructions involv-
ing verbs needing other kinds of complementation, or has made more substantial
changes.
Before we look at the remaining instances of Norwegian det-constructions with
lexical verbs, the ones in the passive voice, we may conclude that Norwegian det-presen-
tatives involving lexical verbs cause problems for English translators. One way of dealing
with them is to choose a construction without existential there as a dummy subject.
CONTRASTIVE LINGUISTICS, TRANSLATION, AND PARALLEL CORPORA 11

Since an equivalent construction is not available, translators often choose a construction

involving despecification.
On the basis of our quantitative information, we can set up an equivalence hierar-
chy, similar to the one for English there be-constructions, that shows the closest English
equivalents of Norwegian det-constructions with lexical verbs in the active voice.
A constructions with preverbal NPs (subjects);
B there-constructions with be as the main verb;
C constructions with postverbal NPs (objects and subject complements);
D locative inversion;
E there-constructions with be and a postnominal -ing form;
F other constructions.

The two most frequent construction types (A and B), which account for approxi-
mately 64% of the cases (disregarding verbs in the passive), involve some kind of
despecification. Again, we may conclude that our hypothesis regarding obligatory
despecification is not complete, but if one chooses to translate det-constructions with
lexical verbs by structures which are close in form to the original, despecification seems
to be unavoidable.

7.3. Translation of Norwegian Passive Presentatives

Our hypothesis about the translation of Norwegian det-passives was that there
would be obligatory despecification since English must either front the grammatical
object (the postverbal NP) of the original and make it the subject of the clause, or have a
clause with an active verb and thus lose the semantic feature of passivisation. The first
kind of despecification can be said to be pragmatic and is part of the textual meaning of
language; the second is a semantic despecification, and is part of the ideational meaning
of language. Before we go on to look at the figures, I should point out that 77% of the
instances come from the non-fiction part of the material which says something about
the use of the construction.
In more than half of the translations (59%), all or part of the postverbal NP of the
original has been moved to subject position, as in example 23.
(23) I 1959 ble det oppdaget gass i Holland, og oljeselskapene begynte ivrig å utforske andre
deler av Nordsjøen. (ABJH1.2.13.s3)
In 1962 [sic.] gas was discovered in Holland and oil companies began to look with
interest at other areas of the North Sea. (ABJH1T.2.13.s3)
Lit.: In 1959 there was discovered gas in Holland ...

In 27% of the cases, the original postverbal NP is kept in postverbal position also
in the translations. In these cases, some kind of subject (dummy or full noun phrase) has
been introduced. See example 24.
(24) Det ble funnet noe som kunne ha vært en brist i konstruksjonen, og gassen som
eventuelt ville ha lekket ut, var i aller høyeste grad eksplosiv. (GS1.4.s301)
They found something that could have been a construction defect and the gas that
would have leaked out as a result was highly inflammable. (GS1T.4.s293)
Lit.: There was found something that could have been a defect in the construction ...

There are also a few instances of locative inversion. In all but a few of the latter two
cases, the verb is in the active voice. The remaining 14% is made up of various other
constructions, and instances where there is no translation of the construction in ques-
tion at all.
12 Meta, XLIII, 4, 1998

Even though most postverbal NPs in the originals have been moved to subject
position in the translations, everything is done to try to keep as much of the new infor-
mation as possible in postverbal position in the translations as well. That is why we often
have a split subject in the English translation. In the translation of example 25, the com-
plex noun phrase attempts to increase influence in other border areas is split so that most of
it comes after the verb. In the Norwegian original this is achieved by using the dummy
subject.
(25) Det ble gjort forsøk på å styrke innflytelsen i andre grenseområder. (GL1.2.3.2.s26)
Attempts were made to increase influence in other border areas. (GL1T.2.3.2.s24)
Lit.: There were made attempts to increase the influence in other border areas

The reluctance of English to have passive verbs in there-constructions inevitably

leads to either a change of verb form or a non-there-construction. There is strong pres-
sure to keep the passive verb form since it is either put there for a specific purpose, as a
marked structure, or the passive is one of the hallmarks of exactly this particular text
type. In the cases where a there-construction or locative inversion is a possible alterna-
tive, the original verb adds very little to the meaning of whole proposition. One such verb
is holde ("hold"). Further evidence of this comes from the fact that English accepts hold
in postnominal position in original there-constructions, e.g. there was a demonstration
held last night. Norwegian passive presentatives with holde ("hold") are repeatedly trans-
lated by an English there-construction in the material. One example is 26.
(26) Den kvelden ble det holdt en stor fest med bål og ringdans. (SH1.1.8.s165)
That night there was a great festival with fires and circle dancing. (SH1T.1.8.s164)
Lit.: That night there was held a great party with fires and circle dancing

Table 4 summarises in some detail the translation of Norwegian det-constructions

where the verb is in the passive.

fronted NP 79
partly fronted NP 59
138 (59%)
locative inversion 7
dummy subjects (there/it) 19
subjects they/you 11
other subjects 27
64 (27%)
other constructions 33 (14%)
Total 235 (100%)

Table 4
Translation of Norwegian det-passive constructions

Of the three construction types discussed, the translation of det-constructions

with verbs in the passive comes closest to being predicted by our hypothesis. The reluc-
tance to allow verbs in the passive in English there-constructions coupled with the rich
semantic content of transitive verbs leaves the translator little choice.
CONTRASTIVE LINGUISTICS, TRANSLATION, AND PARALLEL CORPORA 13

8. CONCLUSION
In light of the evidence from the corpus material, our initial hypotheses about
optional and obligatory (de)specification in relation to the translation of presentative
constructions between English and Norwegian have been partly confirmed. English
there-be-constructions can be translated into Norwegian det-constructions with lexical
verbs, which leads to specification. When translating Norwegian det-constructions with
lexical verbs into English, despecification is often the result since the parallel English
construction is rare and stylistically marked. The English translation of Norwegian pas-
sive presentatives very often leads to despecification.
The study also showed that only prototypical there-/det-constructions, i.e. the
there be-construction and the det være-construction, can be said to be equivalent, but
even these were not always translated by one another. The reasons for choosing a differ-
ent construction in the translations are varied, and a more thorough study incorporating
more context is needed.
The investigation of the translation of there- and det-constructions has demon-
strated the usefulness of a translation corpus in contrastive analysis. Without the support
of authentic translations in context, the concept of translation equivalence as a contras-
tive methodology is only tentative and lacking in content.

Notes
1. The term "ideational" is replaced by "experiential" in more recent books on Systemic Functional Gram-
mar.
2. The translation reads "There was a man in the boat" (lit.: There was a man in boat—the).
3. Norwegian can have both det ("it/that") and der ("there") as a dummy subject. Der is used by a minority
of Norwegian speakers and occurs in only a few of the corpus texts.
4. To mention but a few corpora: The Chemnitz English—German/German—English Translation/Paral-
lel Corpus (Schmied and Schäffler 1996), the English Comparable Corpus (Laviosa—Braithwaite, forthcom-
ing), the English—Swedish Parallel Corpus (Aijmer, Altenberg, and Johansson 1996), and the German—
Norwegian Parallel Corpus (Fabricius-Hansen 1994).
5. A more detailed description of the structure of the corpus can be found in Johansson and Ebeling
(1996).
6. Deviance in translated text induced by the source language. See section 6.
7. I disregard here gerundive constructions like There is no telling what she will do.
8. Other Norwegian verbs with the meaning of "being in existence" are: befinne seg ("find oneself"), foreko-
mme, foreligge, eksistere ("exist"), herske, råde.
9. It may be that English there's is becoming more and more like the presentative constructions of the other
languages mentioned here in having no concord of verb and postverbal NP, and the formal subject there and
the present tense form of be are becoming “fused into a single presentative formula” (Breivik 1990: 151).
10. For the purpose of this article, lexical verbs refer to verbs that can be said to be semantically richer than
be, være, or other Norwegian verbs denoting existence only. Lexical verbs incorporate an additional semantic
component besides "being in existence", e.g. inception, stance, directed motion.
11. Ideally, one would like to compare the figures of the Norwegian original texts with figures calculated
from an equivalent amount of translated Norwegian text. This has not been feasible within the scope of the
current study.

REFERENCES
AIJMER, K., ALTENBERG, B. and M. JOHANSSON (1996): "Text-based Contrastive Studies in English.
Presentation of a Project", Aijmer, K., B. Altenberg and M. Johansson (Eds), Languages in Contrast.
Papers from a Symposium on Text-based Cross-linguistic Studies. Lund 4-5 March 1994, Lund, Lund
University Press, pp. 73-85.
BAKER, M. (1993): "Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies: Implications and Applications", M. Baker,
F. Francis and E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds), Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair, Amsterdam
and Philadelphia, John Benjamins, pp. 233-250.
BAKER, M. (1995): "Corpora in Translation Studies: an Overview and some Suggestions for Future
Research", Target, 7 (2), pp. 223-243.
14 Meta, XLIII, 4, 1998

BREIVIK, L.E. (1990): Existential there: A Synchronic and Diachronic Study, Oslo, Novus Press.
FAARLUND, J.T., LIE, S. and K.I. VANNEBO (1997): Norsk referansegrammatikk, Oslo,
Universitetsforlaget.
FABRICIUS-HANSEN, Cathrine (1994): Deutsche und norwegische Sachprosa im Vergleich. Ein
Arbeitsbericht, Arbeitsberichte des Germanistischen Instituts der Universität Oslo, Nr. 6, Oslo,
University of Oslo.
HALLIDAY, M.A.K. (1994): An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 2nd edition, London, Edward Arnold.
JAMES, C. (1980): Contrastive Analysis, London, Longman.
JOHANSSON, S. and J. EBELING (1996): "Exploring the English-Norwegian Parallel Corpus", Percy,
C.E., C.F. Meyer and I. Lancaster (Eds), Synchronic Corpus Linguistics. Papers from the Sixteenth
International Conference on English Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 16), Amsterdam,
Rodopi, pp. 41-56.
JOHANSSON, S. and K. HOFLAND (1994): "Towards an English-Norwegian Parallel Corpus", Fries, U.,
G. Tottie and P. Schneider (Eds), Creating and Using English Language Corpora, Amsterdam, Rodopi,
pp. 25-37.
LAVIOSA, S. (1998): "The English Comparable Corpus: a Resource and a Methodology", L. Bowker, M.
Cronin, D. Kenny and J. Pearson (Eds), Unity in Diversity? Current Trends in Translation Studies,
Manchester, St. Jerome Publishing.
LEVIN, B. (1993): English Verb Classes and Alternations. A Preliminary Investigation, Chicago, The
University of Chicago Press.
LEVIN, B. and M. RAPPAPORT HOVAV (1995): Unaccusativity: At the Syntax-Lexical Semantics Interface,
Cambridge (Mass.), The MIT Press.
NEWMARK, P. (1988): A Textbook of Translation, New York, Prentice Hall.
QUIRK, R., GREENBAUM, S., LEECH, G. and J. SVARTVIK (1985): A Comprehensive Grammar of the
English Language, London, Longman.
SCHMIED, J. and H. SCHÄFFLER (1996): "Approaching Translationese through Parallel and Translation
Corpora", Percy, C.E., C.F. Meyer and I. Lancaster (Eds), Synchronic Corpus Linguistics. Papers from the
Sixteenth International Conference on English Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 16),
Amsterdam, Rodopi, pp. 41-56.

APPENDIX 1

English texts
Fiction
AB1 Brookner, Anita: Latecomers
ABR1 Brink, André: The Wall of the Plague
AT1 Tyler, Anne: The Accidental Tourist
BC1 Chatwin, Bruce: Utz
BO1 Okri, Ben: The Famished Road
DF1 Francis, Dick: Straight
DL1 Lessing, Doris: The Fifth Child
DL2 Lessing, Doris: The Good Terrorist
FW1 Weldon, Fay: The Heart of the Country
GN1 Naylor, Gloria: The Women of Brewster Place
JB1 Barnes, Julian: Talking It Over
JC1 Crace, Jim: Arcadia
JH1 Heller, Joseph: Picture This
JSM1 Smiley, Jane: A Thousand Acres
MA1 Atwood, Margaret: Cat's Eye
MD1 Drabble, Margaret: The Middle Ground
MM1 Magorian, Michelle: Goodnight Mister Tom
NG1 Gordimer, Nadine: My Son's Story
PDJ3 James, P.D.: Devices and Desires
RD1 Dahl, Roald: Matilda
RDO1 Doyle, Roddy: Paddy Clarke Ha Ha Ha
RR1 Rendell, Ruth: Kissing the Gunner's Daughter
CONTRASTIVE LINGUISTICS, TRANSLATION, AND PARALLEL CORPORA 15

SG1 Grafton, Sue: “D” is for Deadbeat

SK1 King, Stephen: Cujo
ST1 Townsend, Sue: The Queen and I
TH1 Hayden, Torey: The Sunflower Forest

Non-fiction
AEEA1 European Union: Agreement on the European Economic Area
DM1 Morris, Desmond: Animalwatching
EEA1 European Council: Council Directive 86/378/EEC
EEA2 European Council: Council Directive 89/391/EEC
EEA3 European Council: Council Directive 93/104/EC
HB1 Bloom, Harold: Ruin the Sacred Truths
KAR1 Armstrong, Karen: A History of God: from Abraham to the present: the 4000-year Quest of God
LT1 Timberlake, Lloyd: Only One Earth: Living for the Future
MAAS1 European Union: The Maastricht Treaty
MAW1 Walker, Martin: The Waking Giant
OS1 Sacks, Oliver: The Man who Mistook His Wife for a Hat
PM1 Mayle, Peter: A Year in Provence
RF1 Ferguson, Robert: Henry Miller - A Life
SJG1 Gould, Stephen Jay: Hen's Teeth and Horse's Toes

Norwegian texts
Fiction
BV1 Vik, Bjørg: En håndfull lengsel (Out of Season and Other Stories)
BV2 Vik, Bjørg: Kvinneakvariet (An Aquarium of Women)
CL1 Løveid, Cecilie: Sug (Sea Swell)
EG1 Griffiths, Ella: Mord på side 3 (Murder on Page Three)
EG2 Griffiths, Ella: Vannenken (The Water Widow)
EH1 Hoem, Edvard: Kjærleikens ferjereiser (The Ferry Crossing)
EHA1 Haslund, Ebba: Det hendte ingenting (Nothing Happened)
FC1 Carling, Finn: Under aftenhimmelen (Under the Evening Sky)
GS1 Staalesen, Gunnar: I mørket er alle ulver grå (At Night All Wolves Are Grey)
HW1 Wassmo, Herbjørg: Huset med den blinde glassveranda (The House with the Blind Glass Windows)
JW1 Wiese, Jan: Kvinnen som kledte seg naken for sin elskede (The Naked Madonna)
JG1 Gaarder, Jostein: Sofies verden - Roman om filosofiens historie (Sophie's World)
KA1 Askildsen, Kjell: En plutselig frigjørende tanke (A Sudden Liberating Thought)
KF1 Faldbakken, Knut: Adams dagbok (Adam's Diary)
KF2 Faldbakken, Knut: Insektsommer (Insect Summer)
KFL1 Fløgstad, Kjartan: Dalen Portland (Dollar Road)
KH1 Holt, Kåre: Kappløpet (The Race)
LSC1 Christensen, Lars Saabye: Herman (Herman)
LSC2 Christensen, Lars Saabye: Jokeren (The Joker)
MN1 Newth, Mette: Bortførelsen (The Abduction)
OEL1 Lønn, Øystein: Tom Rebers siste retrett (Tom Reber's Last Retreat)
SH1 Holmås, Stig: Tordensønnen (Son-of-Thunder)
SL1 Lie, Sissel: Løvens hjerte (Lion's Heart)
TB1 Brekke, Toril: Jakarandablomsten (The Jacaranda Flower)
THA1 Haugen, Tormod: Zeppelin (Zeppelin)
TTH1 Hauger, Torill Thorstad: Røvet av vikinger (Captured by the Vikings)

Non-fiction
ABJH1 Bryne, Arvid and Joan Henriksen: Norge fra innsiden
(Norway behind the Scenery)
16 Meta, XLIII, 4, 1998

AOH1 Hauglid, Anders Ole: Maihaugen - De Sandvigske Samlinger

(Maihaugen - The Sandvig Collections Guide)
BAA1 Aarseth, Bjørn: Samene igår og idag
(The Sami - Past and Present)
GL1 Lundestad, Geir: Øst, vest, nord, sør - Hovedlinjer i internasjonal politikk 1945-1990
(East, West, North, South - Major Developments in International Politics 1945-1990)
JIH1 Haugen, Jan Ivar (ed.): Norges historie - Fra istid til oljealder
(History of Norway)
JS1 Sandnes, Jørn (ed.): Trondheim - Olavs by i tusen år
(Trondheim - One Thousand Years in the City of St. Olav)
KL1 Kommunaldepartementet: Kommuneloven
(Act Concerning Municipalities and County Municipalities (Local Government Act))
KP1 Prytz, Kåre: Vestover før Columbus
(Westward before Columbus)
KT1 Thorsen, Kjell: Christian Radich - Det store Amerikatoktet
(Christian Radich. The Adventure of Oslo's Square Rigger)
NFRA1 Norges forskningsråd: Årsmelding 1993
(Annual report 1993)
PEJ1 Johnson, Pål Espolin: Alt for Norge
(For Love of Norway)
SI1 Statens informasjonstjeneste: Småbarnsforeldres rettigheter
(The rights of parents of small children)
TG1 Greipsland, Torbjørn (ed.): Kongen på kirkevei
(Olav V: A King and His Church)