VYTAUTAS MAGNUS UNIVERSITY Jurgita VAIČENONIENĖ LITHUANIAN LITERATURE IN ENGLISH: A CORPUS-BASED APPROACH TO THE TRANSLATION OF AUTHOR-SPECIFIC NEOLOGISMS Doctoral dissertation Humanities, philology (04H) Kaunas, 2011 UDK 82.03 Va-65 This doctoral dissertation was written at Vytautas Magnus University in 2006–2011. The right for the joint doctoral studies was accorded to Vytautas Magnus University and the Institute of the Lithuanian Language on July 15, 2003 according to the decree of the Government of the Republic of Lithuania No. 926. Research supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Violeta Kalėdaitė Vytautas Magnus University, Humanities, Philology – 04 H ISBN 978-9955-12-745-1 VYTAUTO DIDŽIOJO UNIVERSITETAS Jurgita VAIČENONIENĖ LIETUVIŲ LITERATŪRA ANGLŲ KALBA: TEKSTYNU PAREMTAS AUTORINIŲ NEOLOGIZMŲ VERTIMO TYRIMAS Daktaro disertacija Humanitariniai mokslai, filologija (04H) Kaunas, 2011 Disertacija rengta 2006 – 2011 metais Vytauto Didžiojo universitete. Doktorantūros teisė suteikta Vytauto Didžiojo universitetui kartu su Lietuvių kalbos institutu Lietuvos Respublikos Vyriausybės 2003 m. liepos 15 d. nutarimu Nr. 926. Mokslinė vadovė Doc. dr. Violeta Kalėdaitė Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas, humanitariniai mokslai, filologija – 04H Acknowledgements I would truly like to thank everyone who made this thesis possible. My deepest gratitude goes to my supervisor Assoc. Prof. Dr. Violeta Kalėdaitė who has generously given her expertise and supportive advice to better my work. It has been an honor to be her first Ph.D. student. I thank Prof. Habil. Dr. Rūta Marcinkevičienė for her encouragement and valuable ideas at the right time, and Assoc. Prof. Dr. Andrius Utka, whose knowledge and assistance with the corpus creation made the impossible possible for me. I am particularly indebted to Prof. Habil. Dr.Viktorija Skrupskelytė, Dr. Algis Brown and Danguolė Valančė for their valuable readership and comments. My thanks and appreciation must also go to the Center of Foreign Languages at Vytautas Magnus University. If not for my colleagues, who took my share of work, this dissertation would not have been finished on time. Especially I need to express my gratitude to Dr. Dorothy Kenny, whose Lexis and Creativity in Translation (2001) was my inspiration and guide. Thank you for organizing my visit to Dublin City University. I appreciate the warm hospitality received from Prof. Jenny Williams. I would also like to thank the defence committee members: Prof. Habil. Dr. Milda Danytė, Prof. Habil. Dr. Aloyzas Gudavičius, Prof. Dr. Jadvyga Krūminienė, Prof. Habil. Dr. Rūta Marcinkevičienė, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Jūratė Ruzaitė, Prof. Habil. Dr. Aurelija Usonienė, and Dr. Loreta Vaicekauskienė for their time and insightful comments. Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends for their belief in me, immeasurable patience and moral support during the everlasting years of my education. Thank You. i CONTENTS Acknowledgements i List of tables, figures and illustrations iv List of abbreviations vi 1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 TRANSLATION STUDIES AND CORPUS LINGUISTICS 6 2.1 Descriptive translation research: from norms to universals 7 2.1.1 Translation as a norm-governed process 8 2.1.2 Interface between Toury’s norms and the ethno-centric approach 10 to translation 2.1.3 Features of translation 13 2.2 Corpus research as a method for the investigation of features of 20 translation 2.2.1 Definition and types of corpora 20 2.2.1.1 Parallel corpora 22 2.2.1.2 Comparable corpora 23 2.2.2 Corpus compilation requirements 24 2.2.2.1 The issue of representativeness 24 2.2.2.2 Corpus size 26 2.2.3 Corpus creation requirements and minor languages 27 2.2.4 Corpus analysis 29 2.2.4.1 Global statistics of corpus data 29 2.2.4.2 Wordlists 31 2.2.4.3 Keyword lists and concordances 33 3 AUTHOR-SPECIFIC NEOLOGISMS 36 3.1 Author-specific words in the context of neologisms 36 3.1.1 Sources of neologism appearance 38 3.1.2 Origin of neologisms 39 3.2 Word-formation processes 44 3.3 Definition of author-specific neologisms 49 3.4 Overview of research related to author-specific neologisms 51 4 MATERIAL AND METHOD: CONSTRUCTION AND PROCESSING 54 OF THE LITHUANIAN-ENGLISH CORPUS OF PROSE (LECOP) 4.1 Material: corpus compilation 54 4.2 Method: data retrieval and verification 62 4.3 Levels of data classification and analysis 69 5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 72 5.1 Preliminary norms investigated: literary translation in Anglo-American 72 countries and Lithuania (since 1990) 5.2 Analysis of author-specific neologisms retrieved from the hapax and low 85 frequency forms 5.2.1 Translation of grapho-phonological deviations 87 ii 5.2.2 Translation of nonce-words 94 5.2.3 Translation of compounds 96 5.2.3.1 Lithuanian origin compounds 97 5.2.3.2 Foreign origin compounds 101 5.2.4 Translation of derivatives 105 5.2.4.1 Derivation with Lithuanian origin morphemes 106 5.2.4.2 Derivation with foreign origin morphemes 113 5.3 Analysis of author-specific neologisms retrieved from KWs 119 5.4 Final statistics and discussion 124 6 CONCLUSION 131 REFERENCES 136 APPENDIX A The LECOP Content: Lithuanian Literature Translated into 146 English (1990-2009) APPENDIX B Author-Specific Neologisms in the LECOP and their 157 Translations into English iii List of tables, figures and illustrations Table 2.1 Possible relationships between language pairs in parallel corpora projects 28 Table 2.2 Type-token ratio for Juknaitė’s Stiklo šalis (1995) and its 30 English translations Table 2.3 Some statistics for Juknaitė’s Stiklo šalis (1995) and its English translations 31 Table 2.4 Ten most frequent items in Lithuanian and English texts from the LECOP 32 Table 2.5 The first ten hapaxes in Lithuanian and English texts from the LECOP 32 Table 2.6 Keywords in an extract of Pabėgęs dvaras (2005) by Beresnevičius 34 Table 2.7 Concordance of ZAUZAU in the LECOP 35 Table 4.1 Initial characteristics of the LECOP 55 Table 4.2 The characteristics of translators in English subcorpus of the LECOP 61 Table 4.3 Author-specific neologisms extracted from KeyWord lists 65 Table 4.4 Author-specific neologisms retrieved from the low frequency words 65 Table 5.1 The statistics of translations in UK/US (1990-2005) based on 73 UNESCO’s data Table 5.2 Languages from which translations were made (2006-2009) 76 Table 5.3 Languages into which Lithuanian literature is translated (1990-2009) 77 Table 5.4 Publishers of Lithuanian literature translated into English 78 Table 5.5 Approach towards standardized and creative translation taken in the LECOP 86 Table 5.6 Translation of grapho-phonological deviations 93 Table 5.7 Concordances for the MAHU in the CCLL 94 Table 5.8 Example evidence for the use of node CA in the CCLL 95 Table 5.9 Example evidence for the use of nodes TAHU, MAHU and CA in the BNC 95 Table 5.10 Translation of nonce-words 96 Table 5.11 Translation of Lithuanian and foreign origin compounds 105 Table 5.12 Translation of Lithuanian and foreign origin derivatives 118 Table 5.13 Translation of author-specific neologisms extracted from the KW lists 123 Table 5.14 Translation of author-specific KWs in the LECOP organized according to 123 the text Table 5.15 Standardization of author-specific neologisms in the LECOP 125 according to the determined categories Table 5.16 Standardization of author-specific neologisms in the LECOP according to 126 their origin Table 5.17 Adequacy versus acceptability-oriented creative translation in the LECOP 127 Table 5.18 Translation of author-specific neologisms in LECOP organized according to 129 the text Figure 2.1 Classification of corpora used in translation research 21 Figure 3.1 Classification of neologisms according to the level of language (Jakaitienė 37 2009) Figure 3.2 Classification of neologisms according to the most productive sources 39 Figure 3.3 Neologisms according to their origin (Jakaitienė 2009) 40 Figure 3.4 Word-formation processes in Lithuanian and English 46 Figure 3.5 Classification of author-specific neology based on results of 50 the LECOP data Figure 4.1 Distribution of author-specific neologisms retrieved from the LECOP 70 Figure 5.1 Relation of translations and original literature (2005-2009) 75 Figure 5.2 Average editions of translated and original literature 76 Figure 5.3 The growth of translated books into the English language (1990-2009) 79 Figure 5.4 Distribution of translated genres (1990-2009) 80 Figure 5.5 The image of Lithuania through prose translations 81 iv Illustration 4.1 An example of an aligned text file (Ivanauskaitė’s 59 Placebas, 2003) Illustration 4.2 Header information for Ivanauskaitė's Placebas (2003) 60 Illustration 4.3 Basic statistics for the Lithuanian subcorpus of the LECOP 63 Illustration 4.4 Concordances for the node SRALIN* (Gavelis’Vilniaus 67 pokeris, 1990) Illustration 4.5 ParaConc hits for the node NUMUKAGALV* 68 (Sruoga’s Dievų miškas, 2005) Illustration 4.6 The BNC search results for the English translations of 69 Lithuanian author-specific neologisms v List of abbreviations BNC The British National Corpus CCLL The Corpus of Contemporary Lithuanian Language CTS Corpus-based Translation Studies DLKG The Grammar of Modern Lithuanian (Dabartinės Lietuvių kalbos gramatika) DTS Descriptive Translation Studies GEPCOLT The German-English Parallel Corpus of Literary Texts KW Keyword KWIC Keyword in context LECOP The Lithuanian-English Corpus of Prose LKE The Encyclopedia of Lithuanian language (Lietuvių kalbos enciklopedija) LKŽ The Lithuanian Language Dictionary (Lietuvių kalbos žodynas) LT Literary translation NON-TEC The Non-Translational English Corpus OALD The Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary ST Source text TEC The Translational English Corpus ThTS Theoretical Translation Studies TT Target text TŽŽ The Dictionary of International Words (Tarptautinių žodžių žodynas) vi 1 INTRODUCTION Relevance of the topic The methods of corpus linguistics have become especially valued and popular in the work of Lithuanian researchers in the last decade (e.g., Marcinkevičienė 2000; Mikelionienė 2000a, Utka 2004; Rimkutė 2006; Juknevičienė 2011).