Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная
лингвистика
и
лингводидактика
–
Foreign
Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Journal home page:
https://inscience.uz/index.php/foreign-linguistics
Translation universals in a corpus-based approach
Muslima ABIYATOVA
1
Samarkand State Institute of Foreign Languages
ARTICLE INFO
ABSTRACT
Article history:
Received March 2025
Received in revised form
10
April 2025
Accepted 2 April 2025
Available online
25 May 2025
This article examines the phenomenon of translation
universals,
specifically
explicitation,
implicitation,
normalization, and simplification, through a corpus-based
approach.
Using
both
quantitative
and
qualitative
methodologies, the study examines translated and non-
translated texts from a monolingual similar corpus to find
common linguistic and stylistic trends. Tools like AntConc and
Sketch Engine are used to identify lexical, syntactic, and
pragmatic changes in translated texts. The findings show that
translated texts have stronger cohesiveness, less lexical variety,
and more transparency, demonstrating the presence of
universal elements in translated speech. Furthermore, the study
explores the sociocultural and cognitive elements that influence
these patterns, stressing the importance of corpus approaches
in translation research. The work adds to a better
understanding of translation as a linguistic and culturally
mediated activity, providing insights applicable to both
translation theory and education.
2181-3701
/©
2025 in Science LLC.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47689/2181-3701-vol3-iss5
/S
-pp9-16
This is an open-access article under the Attribution 4.0 International
(CC BY 4.0) license (
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.ru
Keywords:
corpus-based translation,
translation universals,
explicitation,
implicitation,
simplification,
normalization,
comparable corpora.
Tarjima universallarini korpus asosida tahlil qilish
ANNOTATSIYA
Kalit so‘zlar
:
korpus asosidagi tarjima,
tarjima universallari,
ochiqlik,
yashirinlik,
soddalashtirish,
normallashtirish,
taqqoslama korpuslar.
Ushbu maqola tarjima jarayonida doimiy kuzatiladigan
universal hodisalar ochiqlik, yashirinlik, normallashtirish va
soddalashtirishni korpus lingvistikasi asosida tahlil qiladi.
Miqdoriy va sifat jihatdan yondashilgan ushbu tadqiqotda
tarjima qilingan hamda tarjima qilinmagan matnlar bir tildagi
o‘xshash korpuslardan foydalanilgan holda solishtiriladi.
AntConc va Sketch Engine dasturlari yordamida tarjima
matnlarida yuzaga keladigan leksik, sintaktik va pragmatik
1
Student, Samarkand State Institute of Foreign Languages. E-mail: muslimaabiyatova6@gmail.com
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Special Issue
–
5 (2025) / ISSN 2181-3701
10
o‘zgarishlar aniqlanadi. Tadqiqot natijalari
shuni ko‘rsatadiki,
tarjima matnlari asli matnlarga nisbatan kuchliroq bog‘liqlik,
kamroq leksik xilma-xillik va yuqoriroq tushunarlilik
xususiyatlariga ega bo‘ladi. Bu esa tarjimalarda universal til
elementlari mavjudligini tasdiqlaydi. Bundan tashqari,
maqolada bunday hodisalarga ta’sir qiluvchi ijtimoiy
-madaniy
va kognitiv omillar ham muhokama qilinadi. Ushbu ish
tarjimani til va madaniyat bilan bog‘liq jarayon sifatida
chuqurroq tushunishga hissa qo‘shadi va tarjima nazariyasi
hamda amaliyoti uchun foydali xulosalarni beradi.
Переводческие универсалии в корпусном подходе
АННОТАЦИЯ
Ключевые слова:
корпусный перевод,
универсалии перевода,
эксплицитность,
имплицитность,
упрощение,
нормализация,
сопоставимые корпуса.
В статье анализируются универсальные явления,
регулярно
наблюдаемые
в
процессе
перевода:
эксплицитность,
имплицитность,
нормализация
и
упрощение. Исследование основано на методах корпусной
лингвистики и опирается на сочетание количественного и
качественного подходов. В рамках работы проводится
сопоставление
переведённых
и
оригинальных
(непереведённых) текстов в пределах одноязычных
сопоставимых корпусов. С использованием программных
средств AntConc и Sketch Engine выявлены лексические,
синтаксические и прагматические изменения, характерные
для
переводных
текстов.
Результаты
анализа
свидетельствуют о том, что переводы демонстрируют
повышенную связность, более низкое лексическое
разнообразие и большую прозрачность по сравнению с
оригиналами. Эти особенности подтверждают наличие так
называемых универсальных признаков переводного
текста. Дополнительно в статье рассматриваются
социокультурные и когнитивные факторы, влияющие на
проявление данных универсалий. Представленные выводы
способствуют углублённому пониманию
перевода как
сложного языкового и культурно обусловленного процесса,
а также предоставляют ценные ориентиры для развития
теории и практики перевода.
INTRODUCTION
The study of corpus-based translation has grown significantly in recent years,
radically altering the way that translation is perceived and studied. Wide and numerous
parallel, comparative, and translational corpora have been made possible by the quick
development of corpus linguistics tools and techniques. To identify certain
characteristics of translated texts, these corpora have been painstakingly assembled and
examined. To provide a thorough and data-driven understanding of the translation
process, researchers have used corpus-based approaches to investigate a variety of
topics, such as the analysis of translator style, translator training, and interpreting.
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Special Issue
–
5 (2025) / ISSN 2181-3701
11
Corpus-based translation studies represent a significant departure from the
prescriptive methodologies that previously dominated translation research.
Conventional translation studies frequently relied on intuition, anecdotal evidence, and a
small number of sample texts, with the primary goal of obtaining source-text equivalence
where the target text closely resembles the meaning and structure of the original.
Corpus-based techniques, on the other hand, are concerned with characterizing the
actual characteristics of translation as well as establishing the translational norms that
emerge from real-world practice. These studies use statistical analysis of large-scale
corpus data to identify the underlying properties of translation, resulting in a more
sophisticated and empirical knowledge of the process.
The capacity of corpus-based research to transcend subjective interpretation is its
greatest strength. Researchers can find linguistic trends and characteristics in large
corpora that are not readily noticeable in smaller, anecdotal samples. Changes in
vocabulary choice, syntactic organization, and stylistic tendencies specific to translations
are some examples of these trends. Additionally, corpus-based research can uncover the
fundamental processes of translation, like explicitation (making hidden meaning explicit)
and simplification, by contrasting translated texts with their non-translated counterparts.
Linking translation techniques to larger social and cultural settings is another
important benefit of corpus-based translation study. Researchers can investigate how
translation norms develop in response to societal pressures, cultural alterations, and
ideological changes by looking at corpus data. This viewpoint makes it possible to
comprehend translation more thoroughly as a social and cultural phenomenon as well as
a language practice.
LITERATURE REVIEW AND METHODOLOGY
The idea of the “corpus” has developed greatly since its creation.
Originally
described as a collection of an author's works [2; 223 p], the word is now more generally
used to describe a digital database of spoken and written materials that may be
processed mechanically or semi-automatically. Corpus linguistics as a field began in the
1960s with the introduction of the first computer-readable corpora, such as the Brown
Corpus and the Lancaster-Oslo-Bergen Corpus. These early studies paved the way for
bigger, more complicated corpora, such as the British National Corpus (BNC) and the
Bank of English. Corpus linguistics gained popularity in the 1980s and 1990s, when
scholars such as Laviosa-Braithwaite established it as a field of general linguistics based
on the study of huge machine-readable texts. During this time, multi-million-word
corpora were developed using breakthroughs in optical character recognition and text
retrieval software. The unification of data, description, theory, and technique resulted in
corpus linguistics becoming acknowledged as a separate field [15; 43 p].
Corpora provide two key advantages: access to big, empirical datasets of natural
conversation and the capacity to conduct studies that would otherwise be impossible [6;
169 p]. Empirical evidence frequently challenges linguistic intuitions, providing more
trustworthy conclusions. These corpora have had an influence on both descriptive
linguistics and lexicography, with dictionary projects like COBUILD primarily reliant on
corpus data.
Corpus-based research in translation studies allows for the combination of linguistic
and cultural methods. Scholars such as Toury emphasize the necessity of identifying
behavioral patterns in translation, although Hermans and Mason warn against over-
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Special Issue
–
5 (2025) / ISSN 2181-3701
12
reliance on quantitative analysis, emphasizing the need to consider context, genre, and
thematic aim [17]. Baker was essential in bridging corpus linguistics and translation
studies, claiming that large-scale corpora can show the character of translated texts as
mediated communication experiences. The 1990s were a watershed moment in translation
study, since pragmatics, and critical linguistics all had an impact on it. Parallel, multilingual,
and monolingual comparative corpora became common in translation research. This
paradigm change enables scholars to use corpus-based methodologies to investigate the
interplay of language, culture, and ideology in translated texts [1].
This study uses a corpus-based qualitative and quantitative technique to analyze
translated texts in a specific language and cultural context. A monolingual comparable
corpus will be created, consisting of translated and untranslated texts from the same
genre and historical period, in accordance with the design principles established by
Baker and Laviosa-Braithwaite [15].
The texts will be gathered digitally and analyzed with concordance software tools
like AntConc or Sketch Engine to extract lexical, syntactic, and pragmatic use patterns.
These patterns will be statistically evaluated to uncover recurring translation trends,
with a focus on translation universals like simplification, explicitation, and normalization.
The qualitative analysis will concentrate on genre, discourse, and rhetorical
structures, as recommended by Mason and Hermans, while ensuring that contextual and
purposeful features of the texts are not ignored. This mixed-method approach enables a
thorough analysis of both the language characteristics and the ideological foundations of
translated texts.
The research will be conducted iteratively, including corpus design, hypothesis
creation, pattern detection, and assessment, in accordance with Laviosa-
Braithwaite’s
bottom-up technique. The merging of quantitative data with qualitative interpretation
seeks to give a comprehensive understanding of translation as a culturally and
linguistically influenced process [15; 43 p].
Bernardini distinguishes several distinct types of corpora compiled and used for
the purposes of translation studies: Parallel corpora involve source texts of a language
and it is target texts in another languages, which are aligned at a certain level. As for
number of languages involved parallel corpus could be categorized as a bilingual or
multilingual language corpus. From direction point parallel corpora could be divided
unidirectional, bidirectional and multidirectional language corpus. A unidirectional
parallel corpus includes source texts of one language and their target texts in another
language. A bidirectional parallel corpus includes the source texts of language A and their
target texts in language B, as well as the source texts of language B and their target texts
in language A. A multidirectional parallel corpus includes the source texts of one
language combined with their translations into two or more languages. Comparable
corpora involve texts that can be compared at different levels. They can be monolingual,
bilingual, or multilingual. A monolingual comparable corpus consists of non-translated
texts and translated ones in the same language. The other two types of comparable
corpora contain texts in two or more languages that are comparable but not in a
translation relationship [4; 51-70 p].
Translational corpora contain texts translated from one or more languages into a
certain language. Obviously, translational corpora are compiled for investigating features
of translations, norms, and style. Interpreting corpora involve texts transcribed
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Special Issue
–
5 (2025) / ISSN 2181-3701
13
orthographically from video or audio files with the purpose of investigating interpreting
strategies, linguistic features of interpreted texts, norms, and the cognitive process of
interpreting. Irrespective of the specific type of corpus, as Hu remarks, the use of corpora
in translation teaching has two major advantages:
1)Automatic extraction and analysis of data;
2)Automatic presentation of abundant translation examples. Both features are
crucial for advancing and enhancing [8].
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Baker introduced the notion of translation universals, building on prior work by
Vanderauwera, Blum-
Kulka, and Shlesinger. Baker’s hypothesis proposed that translated
texts display different qualities known as “translation universals” as a result of the
translation process. Baker made a substantial contribution by using similar corpora to
experimentally investigate translation universals. According to Baker, by comparing
translated and non-translated texts within the same language, researchers may extract
traits emerging only from the translation process, without influence from the source
language. In recent years, corpus-based study of translation universals has become a
focus of translation studies, and most of the investigations are empirical studies of the
translation universals including explicitation, implicitation, simplification, and
normalization.
a)
Explicitation:
One of the most commonly researched translation universals is
explicitation. This term, first suggested by Blum-Kulka, relates to a translator's tendency
to make implicit information in the source language obvious in the destination version.
Blum-Kulka noticed that this effect causes translations to have higher textual
cohesiveness, resulting in more repetitive and overt statements than those present in the
source language [5]. Seguinot broadened the definition of explicitation beyond cohesive
devices, arguing that it includes any attempts to clarify concepts suggested in the source.
Similarly, Baker stressed that translators frequently “spell things out” to help the reader
understand. Explicitation therefore refers to the overt statement in translated writings of
information that is implicit in the source texts, hence improving readability and
comprehension for target audiences. [3]. Liang Shiqiu and Zhu Shenghao’s translations of
Shakespeare's Hamlet exemplify this pattern. For example, both translators clarify
cultural allusions like as “caviar” and explain logical or modal components that were
solely implicit in the original. These modifications demonstrate a systematic preference
for explicitation in literary translation.
Huang differentiated explicitation into interlingual and intralingual categories
based on whether comparisons are conducted between languages or within the same
language [11; 270 p]. Hu and Zeng offered a more sophisticated categorization based on
comparison object (interlingual vs. intralingual), content (semantic vs. syntactic), and
necessity (obligatory vs. optional). While semantic explicitation is typically optional and
is determined by environmental and social circumstances, syntactic explicitation is
sometimes required due to language variations.
Ke divided explicitation into formal and semantic categories, noting that it is more
than just cohesiveness; it also entails revealing inferred meanings for the intended
audience [13; 45 p]. Although Blum-Kulka proposed that explicitation is inherent in
translation and not the result of language-specific or cultural differences, subsequent
research shows that its degree varies depending on the translator’s style, linguistic
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Special Issue
–
5 (2025) / ISSN 2181-3701
14
competence, and translation strategies (e.g., domestication vs. foreignization) [5;119 p].
For example, Hu and Zhu examined the Chinese translations of Hamlet and discovered
that Zhu Shenghao’s version was clearer than Liang Shiqiu’s. This distinction is due to
different translation goals: Liang prioritized integrity and utilized more literal
translations, whereas Zhu sought for accessibility among broad readers, emphasizing
paraphrasing and adding for clarity.
b)
Implicitation:
Implicitation, as opposed to explicitation, entails making explicit
information in the source text more implicit in the destination text, as long as meaning
and reader understanding are retained. Implicitation, first proposed by Vinay and
Darbelnet, tries to simplify expression while boosting fluency and naturalness in the
target language. Implicitation can be classified into syntactic and semantic forms.
Syntactic implicitation comprises leaving out explicit syntactic indicators like
conjunctions, which are frequently substituted with implicit logical linkages signaled by
sentence order. Semantic implicitation, on the other hand, is removing explicitly
expressed notions that may be deduced from context. This frequently happens when
culturally sensitive or possibly objectionable phrases are substituted with euphemisms
or broad idioms. Several studies have looked into implicitation from linguistic, cultural,
and cognitive perspectives. Klaudy and Károly investigated lexical and grammatical
forms including omission, contraction, and generalization. According to Ke, language
structures, translation competency, and socio-cultural circumstances all have an impact
on implicitation. Similarly, Huang discovered that personal pronouns were used less
frequently in Chinese translations than in English source texts, indicating a preference for
implicit pronoun use [11; 270 p].
Hu and Zhu discovered multiple instances of implicitation in Liang’s and Zhu’s
Hamlet translations, particularly with function words like as “it”, “this”, and “so”. They
found 233 instances of implicitation, 141 of explicitation, and just 40 of literal translation.
Like explicitation, implicitation is influenced by the translation process, linguistic norms,
and translator agency. Translation, according to relevance theory, is a dual
communicative act involving two contexts: the interaction between the source text
author and the translator, and the interaction between the translator and target reader.
What is considered implicit or explicit depends on the cognitive surroundings of the
participants, so that implicitation may occur spontaneously when translators anticipate
the cognitive expectations of their target audience [9; 15 p].
c)
Simplification:
Blum-Kulka and Levenston first developed the concept of
simplification in translation in 1983, when they discovered lexical simplification in
Hebrew-English translation. Vanderauweraexplored syntactic and stylistic simplification,
pointing out that translators frequently prefer finite clauses over non-finite clauses and
utilize short formulations to replace complicated structures. Baker defined simplification
as an unconscious approach, claiming that translated writings typically use fewer words,
a narrower vocabulary, and simpler grammar than their original equivalents.
Simplification expresses itself in lexical choices (for example, choosing high-frequency,
simple phrases), decreased grammatical complexity, and the elimination of unnecessary
or culturally dense information. Corpus-based research has supported this pattern,
finding that translated texts often exhibit reduced lexical richness and grammatical
complexity, resulting in greater accessibility for readers unfamiliar with the source
language or culture [3; 175 p].
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Special Issue
–
5 (2025) / ISSN 2181-3701
15
d)
Normalization:
Vanderauwera defines normalization as the propensity of
translated writings to adhere to the target language's norms in areas such as punctuation,
lexical choice, syntactic structure, and textual organization. This phenomenon is reflected
in translators' inclination to: (1) correct incorrect punctuation; (2) domesticate culturally
loaded terms; (3) simplify complex, incomplete, or unusual syntactic structures; (4) shift
colloquial styles into more formal registers; and (5) rearrange sentences, paragraphs, or
chapters to improve the readability and coherence of the translated text. Normalization
has been examined by empirical investigations in a variety of translation circumstances.
For example, Shlesinger investigated English-interpreted Hebrew texts and discovered
signs of normalization such as rounding off incomplete phrases and fixing ungrammatical
terms. Similarly, may compared French and Russian translations of Virginia Woolf and
William Faulkner's works and discovered that, while the source texts used long, short,
and complex sentences to depict characters' mental states, the target texts frequently
replaced compound sentences with complex ones and rendered incomplete sentences as
complete, demonstrating normalization tendencies. Kenny undertook a corpus-based
examination of English translations of German literary writings, revealing a definite
tendency toward normalization in the translation of original formulations and unusual
collocations [7; 107-122 p].
Conclusion:
The study’s findings support the concept that translation provides
systematic textual adjustments that distinguish it from non-translated speech. Corpus-
based study reveals that explicitation is a common method for improving coherence and
reader understanding, whereas implicitation shows translators' sensitivity to target
language naturalness. Simplicity expresses itself in vocabulary choice and grammatical
structure, making writings more accessible but perhaps diminishing complexity. These
techniques are not only language occurrences; they are heavily impacted by cultural,
cognitive, and ideological variables. Finally, the study emphasizes the importance of
corpus-based techniques in finding translation norms and gives insight on how
translators balance the goals of reliability, clarity, and cultural adaptation.
REFERENCES:
1.
Baker, M. (1993). Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Implications and
applications. In M. Baker et al. (Eds.), Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair
(pp. 233
–
250).
2.
Baker, M. (1995). Corpora in translation studies: An overview and some
suggestions for future research. Target, 7(2), 223
–
243.
3.
Baker, M. (1996). Corpus-based translation studies: The challenges that lie
ahead. In H. Somers (Ed.), Terminology, LSP and translation: (pp. 175
–
186).
4.
Bernardini, S. (2003). Parallel corpora and the search for translation universals:
A critical review. In F. Zanettin, S. Bernardini, & D. Stewart (Eds.), Corpora in Translator
Education (pp. 51
–
70). Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
5.
Blum-Kulka, S., & Levenston, E. A. (1983). Universals of lexical simplification. In
C. Faerch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in interlanguage communication (pp. 119
–
139).
Longman.
6.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1994). Corpus-based approaches to issues in
applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics, 15(2), 169
–
189.
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Special Issue
–
5 (2025) / ISSN 2181-3701
16
7.
Corpus based translation studies. (2023). Conference on Universal Science
Research 2023, 1(11), 165-167.
8.
Hu, K. (2016). Introducing corpus-based translation studies. In New frontiers in
translation studies (pp. xx
–
xx). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-482
9.
Hu, K., & Zeng, L. (2009). A review of explicitation studies in translation. Foreign
Languages and Their Teaching, (2), 15
–
19. (In Chinese)
10.
Huang, B. (2007). A corpus-based study of translation universals in English
–
Chinese translation. Journal of Foreign Languages, 30(3), 56
–
62. (In Chinese)
11.
Huang, Y. (2008). A critical review of explicitation and implicitation in
translation studies. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 40(4), 270
–
276. (In
Chinese)
12.
Kayimova, M. S. (2025). The role of stylistic devices in literary translation.
Shokh Library.
13.
Ke, J. (2005). Explicitation and implicitation in translation. Chinese Translators
Journal, (2), 45
–
50. (In Chinese)
14.
Kohn, K. (1996). Contrastive analysis, error analysis, interlanguage analysis
and corpora. In J. Thomas & M. Short (Eds.), Using Corpora for Language Research (pp.
108
–
117). Longman.
