Chapter 4 Findings
4.1 Explicitation at the intra-sentential level
4.1.4 Causal Conjunctions
Causal conjunctions link two clauses together and indicate the causal relationship between them. While it is entirely possible for a reader, even in the absence of causal conjunctions, to come to the same conclusion on the causal relationship in a sentence, such conjunctions do explicitate the relationship and reduce ambiguity.
45
E.g. It is obvious that the attack was premeditated, because on the day of the offence the defendant brought along knives for the purpose of attacking another person.
E.g. On the day of the offence the defendant brought along knives for the purpose of attacking another person; it is obvious that the attack was premeditated. (Possible alternative translation)
In the actual sentence, the presence of the conjunction "because" strengthens the causal relationship compared to the alternative translation. As for the alternative translation, most readers will be able to draw the causal link between "obvious that the attack was premeditated"
and "on the day of the offence the defendant brought along...", though this would require a small degree of inference on the reader's side.
Table 10 - Number of occurrences of causal conjunctions being used in the corpus Causal conjunction Number of occurrences
in Translational Corpus
Number of occurrences in Non-translational Corpus
Log-likelihood Value
because 156 102 10.29 (+)
so that 45 33 1.61 (+)
Causal Total 201 135 11.71 (+)
(+) More occurrences in translation corpus (-) More occurrences in non-translational corpus
In the case of causal conjunctions, there is a stronger, statistically significant tendency for
“because” to be used in the translational corpus when compared with the non-translational one.
46
While the other connective “so that” has also seen more appearances in the translational corpus, the difference was not big enough for it to qualify for statistical significance. Although we do observe a statistical significance when both connectives are added up, I would hesitate to say that this is strong enough evidence since the high log-likelihood value of “because” has heavily tilted the overall figures towards statistical significance.
Table 11 - More examples of causal conjunctions used at the intra-sentential level 1 At the trial the respondent explained that she committed the offence because in her mind
what she intended to do was just to help her friend and she thought that what she was asked to do would cause her no sweat at all.
2 It was also submitted that even if the application for amendment of the indictment was permissible, it was improper because it was made too late.
3 However, the trial judge equalled the two, so that the Applicant’s operation of an underground bank automatically constituted money laundering.
4 The CFA also pointed out in HKSAR v Li Kwok Cheung George (2014) 17 HKCFAR 319 that, in order to make out the charge, the property has to possess certain characteristics so that at law it constitutes proceeds of an indictable offence, since knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe that property was proceeds of an indictable offence is an essential mental element of the offence of money laundering.
47 4.1.5 Temporal Conjunctions
Temporal conjunctions serve to explicitate the time-related relationship between two clauses, provided details such as whether the event in one clause is happening before, alongside, or after the occurrences described in another clause. For example, "while" can be used to more clearly explicitate the concurrent nature of two events occurring in two clauses, as illustrated below.
E.g. When driving on a main road in the middle of the night and cutting across the opposite carriageway, he paid no attention to the road conditions at all and made an abrupt turn while he was rather close to the vehicle in the opposite carriageway, which resulted in the accident.
E.g. Driving on a main road in the middle of the night and cutting across the opposite
carriageway, he paid no attention to the road conditions at all and made an abrupt turn while he was rather close to the vehicle in the opposite carriageway, which resulted in the accident.
(Possible alternative translation)
The actual translation offers a clearer, more explicitated description of the fact that the two conditions in the sentence, namely that the act of driving and the lack of attention paid, are two states occurring at the same time. Little in terms of information is lost if “when” is omitted since most readers can easily infer the time frame in which the various situations were occurring in, yet the presence of such a connective does help somewhat in improving comprehensibility.
The use of “when” serves to emphasise the concurrent nature of these situations for a reader.
48
Table 12 - Number of occurrences of temporal conjunctions being used in the corpus Number of occurrences
in Translational Corpus
Number of occurrences in Non-translational Corpus
Log-likelihood Value
when 311 206 19.34 (+)
while 48 17 14.76 (+)
Temporal Total 359 223 29.30 (+)
(+) More occurrences in translation corpus (-) More occurrences in non-translational corpus
Here, the evidence is strong that temporal conjunctions is a highly preferred option by translators, given both of the connectives in this category achieved high log-likelihood values.
Table 13 - More examples of temporal conjunctions used at the intra-sentential level 1 He, however, stressed that when sentencing, greater prominence would be given to fatality
only if there existed a higher level of culpability and criminality.
2 When she arrived in Bangladesh, no one came to the airport to pick her up.
3 They put the two suitcases into the taxi boot, and Wu Yangwang got on the taxi, while Lan took the MTR to Lo Wu.
4 While waiting for a train in an MTR station and for no reason at all, he pushed a woman onto a railway track as the train was approaching.
49 4.1.6 Contrastive Conjunctions
The contrastive conjunction acts as a marker distinguishing and explicitating the perceived logical discrepancy between two contrasting situations.
E.g. While it might have been easier to steal a wallet placed beside the victim instead of carried on the victim’s person, this can never constitute a reason for passing a lenient sentence.
E.g. That a wallet placed beside the victim, instead of being carried on the victim's person, might be easier to steal, can never constitute a reason for passing a lenient sentence. (Possible
alternative translation)
In the actual translation, the use of "while" serves to explicitate the contrastive relationship between two clauses, more so than the alternative translation.
Table 14 - Number of occurrences of contrastive conjunctions being used in the corpus Number of occurrences
in Translational Corpus
Number of occurrences in Non-translational Corpus
Log-likelihood Value
but 371 233 28.99 (+)
yet 6 4 0.36 (+)
while 15 27 3.73 (-)
Contrastive Total 392 264 22.53 (+)
(+) More occurrences in translation corpus
50
(-) More occurrences in non-translational corpus
The numbers are interesting, with evidence that “but” is greatly preferred in the
translational corpus. Yet the other two connectives, “yet” and “while”, do not follow this trend.
In fact, there are actually more occurrences of “while” in the non-translational corpus. Once again, while it seems like a statistical significance has been achieved when we add the figures together, said overall figures are in fact more representative of the dominating significance of
“but”.
Table 15 - More examples of contrastive conjunctions used at the intra-sentential level 1 While it is true that the evidence against the applicant is cogent, the outcome of the case must still hinge on whether the applicant had knowledge of the drug, and there is a direct connection between the allegation of attempted flight against the applicant and his knowledge of the drug.
2 While it might have been easier to steal a wallet placed beside the victim instead of carried on the victim’s person, this can never constitute a reason for passing a lenient sentence.
3 On 23 January 2013 the respondent applied for leave to appeal against her conviction, but on 15 February 2013 she notified the court that she abandoned her application, so her
application for leave to appeal against conviction was dismissed.
4 He was caught in a stressful situation but did not seek help from experts.
5 That the defendant intended (intentionally) to cause grievous bodily harm to the victim Wu Yuen Fai, or that the defendant actually foresaw that his acts might cause grievous bodily
51
harm to the victim Wu Yuen Fai and yet, in disregard of that risk, proceeded with his actions when, in all the circumstances known to him, it was unreasonable for him to take the risk and do the acts.
6 If the wife did not receive the maintenance within three months and yet still had to vacate the former matrimonial home, what she could only do was to apply for an order for sale of the said former matrimonial home by auction pursuant to the “charging order” in order to obtain her maintenance.
4.2 Explicitation at the inter-sentential level
At the inter-sentential level, we are covering explicitation that occurs between sentences.
More specifically, we are looking at the transitional words and phrases used to connect sentences logically, which will comprise words used to indicate cause and effect, contrast, supplementary information, priority and definition. An important point to note is that for the study of
transitional words and phrases used at the inter-sentential level, I will only be looking at words and phrases that appear at the beginning of a sentence.
The rationale behind this decision is that such examples display stronger explicitating characteristics, which takes effect at two levels. At the first level, these words and phrases play a role similar to the intra-sentential connectives we had discussed, they draw a reader’s attention to the logical links between two sets of clauses/sentences. And if they are placed at the front of a sentence, these words and phrases emphasise the importance of these logical relationships to an even greater extent.
52
At the inter-sentential level, we are looking at transitional words and phrases used to underscore cause and effect, contrastive, supplementary and priority relations.
4.2.1 Transitional words and phrases for cause and effect
Transitional words may be added to explicitate the cause and effect relationship between two sentences, creating a stronger logical link between two sentences that bear such a
relationship. This may be observed in the following example.
E.g. This is in line with the sentencing principles, but the District Judge also considered another sentencing principle which is equally important, i.e. the totality principle. Therefore, he ordered that only part of the sentence of the assault police charge be run consecutively to that of the charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug.
E.g. This is in line with the sentencing principles, but the District Judge also considered another sentencing principle which is equally important, i.e. the totality principle. He ordered that only part of the sentence of the assault police charge be run consecutively to that of the charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug. (Possible alternative translation)
The use of "therefore" here clarifies the causal relationship between the two sentences.
Had it been left out, the link between the two sentences would not be as clear. In the original example, the District Judge’s action in the second sentence was carried out based on the “totality principle” brought up in the first sentence. If “therefore” was not inserted at the beginning of the
53
second sentence, a reader may overlook this logical link if he or she did not read these two sentences carefully enough.
Table 16 - Number of occurrences of transitional words and phrases for cause and effect being used in the corpus
Number of occurrences in Translational Corpus
Number of occurrences in Non-translational
Corpus
Log-likelihood Value
thus 10 26 7.70 (-)
as a result 16 9 1.84 (+)
therefore 78 9 61.30 (+)
Cause-effect Total 104 44 23.80 (+)
(+) More occurrences in translation corpus (-) More occurrences in non-translational corpus
Under this category, we see “therefore” appearing with an overwhelmingly greater frequency in the translational corpus with 104 occurrences relative to 44 in the non-translational corpus. It should however be noted that the other two connectives did not mirror this trend, instead “thus” showed a greater statistical frequency of occurrence in the non-translational corpus, although the level of significance was not quite as great.
54
Table 17 - More examples of transitional words and phrases for cause and effect used at the inter-sentential level
1 It was one which a judge, having applied his mind to all the relevant factors, could not
reasonably consider it to be within the appropriate range of sentences. Therefore, pursuant to Section 81A of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, Cap. 221, Laws of Hong Kong, an
application was made to the Court of Appeal to review the sentence.
2 In ordering part of the sentence to run consecutively, the trial judge did not consider these factors and make appropriate adjustments. As a result, the total sentence of 36 months he gave was manifestly excessive.
3 They also pointed out that although the shareholders of Jindun Pharma and those of Jindun International are the same, there is no mutual “cross”-holding of the shares of each other; the two companies are independent corporations. Thus it would be unfair if Jindun Pharma’s tender was not selected because of this not-yet-conclusive dispute.
4.2.2 Transitional words and phrases for contrast
Transitional words and phrases in this category play the role of emphasising the contrasting state of matters in two separate sentences. They serve to emphasis the contrasting logic between two sentences.
E.g. That case involved mostly cash (HK$28,000,000) which was all found at the defendant’s residence and the safe deposit boxes at the bank, whereas the present case involves only
remittances from abroad. However, at no stage at trial did the Applicant, who was represented by
55
a Senior Counsel and who gave evidence as well as called witness, raise any query regarding section 25(4).
E.g. That case involved mostly cash (HK$28,000,000) which was all found at the defendant’s residence and the safe deposit boxes at the bank, whereas the present case involves only
remittances from abroad. At no stage at trial did the Applicant, who was represented by a Senior Counsel and who gave evidence as well as called witness, raise any query regarding section 25(4).
In the second example, a reader is likely to overlook the contrasting relationship between the two sentences if “however” had been omitted.
Table 18 - Number of occurrences of transitional words and phrases for contrast being used in the corpus
Number of occurrences in Translational Corpus
Number of occurrences in Non-translational Corpus
Log-likelihood Value
but 20 36 4.98 (-)
by contrast 1 2 0.36 (-)
nevertheless 10 9 0.03 (+)
however 128 144 1.31 (-)
in comparison 1 0 N.A.
on the other hand 18 8 3.74 (+)
56
on the contrary 5 2 1.27 (+)
yet 6 3 0.96 (+)
Contrastive Total 189 204 0.93 (-)
(+) More occurrences in translation corpus (-) More occurrences in non-translational corpus
Of the eight connectives in the category, none had occurred at a statistically greater frequency in the translational corpus, and only four had occurred more frequently in the
translational corpus. The “but” connective showed a statistically higher frequency of occurrence in the non-translational corpus instead. An even more interesting observation is the fact that there were more occurrences of such connectives as a whole in the non-translational evidence. Based on the evidence, there is no doubt that translators do not have a tendency to use more contrastive connectives at the inter-sentential level. In fact, it seems like they tend to shy away from it relative to the writers who wrote in English.
Table 19 - More examples of transitional words and phrases for contrast used at the inter-sentential level
1 The applicants did not testify in court that they thought they would not be prosecuted when they confessed, or that what they had said would not be used as evidence against them. But even had they done so, they could not, as persons who had offered bribes, expect sympathy from the court.
2 Now we can go through Part I slowly, even repeatedly, to understand the context. By
57
contrast, at that time, PW1 was not informed in advance of what the applicants would say, and it was therefore unreasonable to expect him to interrupt before he heard the entirety of what the applicants had to say.
3 The Defendant herein claimed that he had performed strict gatekeeping. Nevertheless, in order to make profits, he was prepared to accept whoever and whatever came along. His clients and deposits were from all over the world.
4 It is certainly uncommon for an informer to be prosecuted. However, the ultimate question is: would the admission of the words of complaint deprive the applicants of a fair trial?
5 The applicant referred to a District Court case (HKSAR v Yu Kwok Ming, DCCC 322/2012) and stated that, despite the larger quantity of heroin involved and the extensive drug
trafficking conviction records of the defendant in that case, the judge adopted a starting point of 3 years and 9 months and did not enhance the sentence. In comparison, the applicant submitted that his sentence was manifestly excessive and unfair.
6 Mr. Tam pressed the point that as far as the “money laundering” offence is concerned, the
‘defendant’s ignorance of the actual source of the “illicit money” is not necessarily a
mitigating factor. On the other hand, if there is evidence to prove that the money involved in the offence was actually “illicit money”, that it was derived from serious crimes and that the defendant was aware of its origin, that would be an aggravating factor.’
7 What’s more, how would drug traffickers hand over drugs of $1 million in value to someone who was completely in the dark? It would easily go missing any time. On the contrary, the defence said that this was obviously a frame-up.
8 In the present case, as pointed out by Mr Tam, the respondent was the only one at fault
58
whereas the deceased was absolutely innocent. Yet the latter lost his precious life as a result of this incident, leaving untold suffering to his family.
4.2.3 Transitional words and phrases for supplementary information
Transitional words and phrases for supplementary information are used to indicate that a particular sentence is expanding on the information contained in the preceding sentence. They are usually used when the preceding sentence has become too long for any additional
information to be added, or if the writer or translator has reason to believe that a reader may overlook the link between the information presented in two sentences. The following example serves to illustrate my point.
E.g. We stress that the applicants are relying only on section 30A(1)(a) of the PBO, and not on the common law or the Bill of Rights. Moreover, this ground of appeal purely concerns a question of law and does not involve any discretion of the court.
E.g. We stress that the applicants are relying only on section 30A(1)(a) of the PBO, and not on the common law or the Bill of Rights. This ground of appeal purely concerns a question of law and does not involve any discretion of the court. (Possible alternative translation)
In the first example, the use of “moreover” reinforces the logical link between the two sentences for a reader and makes it easier for him or her to think of the information in the two
In the first example, the use of “moreover” reinforces the logical link between the two sentences for a reader and makes it easier for him or her to think of the information in the two