從可比語料庫探討法律翻譯的明朗化現象

全文

(1)國立台灣師範大學翻譯研究所碩士論文 A Thesis Presented to the Graduate Institute of Translation and Interpretation National Taiwan Normal University. 指導教授：胡宗文 Advisor: Dr. Daniel Hu. 從可比語料庫探討法律翻譯的明朗化現象 Exploring Explicitation in Legal Translation through a Comparable Corpus. 研究生：鄭暉騰 Advisee: Hui-Teng Tay 中華民國 105 年二月 February 2016.

(2) Abstract Explicitation is a much studied phenomenon and considered by some to be a "universal" of translation. In the field of legal translation, where the precision and accuracy of language are key priorities, it would make sense for explicitation to be more pronounced in translations as opposed to non-translated English texts. But to what extent is this true? This is the primary issue this paper is seeking to explore. Through the use of the easily accessible and versatile corpusprocessing tool AntConc, I analysed a monolingual, comparable corpus consisting of a translational English sub-corpora and a non-translational English sub-corpora, both drawn from court judgments published on the website of the Judiciary of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Due to the unique nature of Hong Kong's legal system, in which both English and Chinese are official languages of the court, a large number of key judgments are translated from Chinese into English presumably for reference purposes, thus making them suitable for the study of translational differences in legal translation. With respect to explicitation, we looked at several explicitation phenomena including the "verb+that-clause" pattern, conjunctions and transitional words. The frequencies of these explicitation phenomena are tabulated, with the difference in frequencies between the translational and non-translational being subjected to a log-likelihood test to determine their significance. The findings as a whole does support the view that explicitating connectives are used in a statistically more pronounced manner in the translated sub-corpora.. i.

(3) Keywords: Corpus, Corpus-based Translation Studies, Explicitation, Explicitation Hypothesis, Hong Kong Judiciary, Legal Judgments, Legal Translation. ii.

(4) 中文摘要明朗化現象是許多學者常會探討的研究項目，也被一些學者稱為翻譯普遍特徵。精確度與準確度在法律翻譯領域裡是極為關鍵的考量，按此邏輯，法律譯文的明朗化現象應該相對於非翻譯文本更為明顯。這個問題，為本研究所探討的題目。通過易用功能性靈活的語料庫工具 AntConc，本研究將會分析單語種的比較語料庫（由自然英文語料庫與中譯英語料庫組成）。此語料庫的資料源自於香港特別行政區司法機構所刊登（於官方網站）的判案理由書。以雙語作為法定語言是香港法律體系獨有的特徵，有大量的中文判案理由書因參考需要被翻譯成英文，因此這些文本適合用於探討法律英譯與自然英文的差異。本研究將會探討的明朗化現象包括報導動詞後接"that"的現象，連接詞，轉折詞等。這些現象的頻率將會被紀錄下來，接著針對英譯與自然英文的頻率差距進行似然比檢驗，以便確認是否有顯著性差異。研究結果顯示譯文裡明朗化頻率普遍高於自然英文。. 關鍵字：語料庫，語料庫翻譯研究，明朗化，香港司法機構，法律判案，法律翻譯. iii.

(5) Acknowledgements Many people have helped me over the course of this journey, and without them, I don’t think I would have made it this far, so here’s a big thank you to everyone who was there for me. My biggest Thank You goes to my thesis advisor Prof. Daniel Hu, your thoughtful recommendations kept me on the right track, and on the path towards graduation. I would also like to thank Paul Cox, head of Winkler Partners' Translation Department, whose feedback and suggestions sparked the inspiration which eventually led to the ideas behind this paper, as well as Peter Dernbach, who took the time to introduce me to Paul. I’m also extremely grateful to my Prof. Posen Liao and Prof. Joe Shih-ping Wang, who kindly agreed to be part of my oral defence panel and provided great feedback on how the thesis could be improved. Last but not least, are my friends and family, who formed a great network that supported me through some tough periods, and it is because of your presence, yes every last one of you, that I’m able to even write this.. iv.

(6) Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................................ i 中文摘要........................................................................................................................................ iii Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ iv List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... vii List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... viii Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Research Rationale ................................................................................................................ 1 1.1.1 Language and Translation in Hong Kong's Legal System ............................................. 2 1.1.2 Explicitation.................................................................................................................... 4 1.1.3 Concordance Tools and Ease of Access to Resources ................................................... 5 1.2 Research Purpose and Questions........................................................................................... 6 1.3 Significance of Research ....................................................................................................... 6 1.4 Thesis Structure ..................................................................................................................... 6 Chapter 2 Literature Review ........................................................................................................... 8 2.1 Corpus-based Translation Studies (CTS) .............................................................................. 8 2.2 Explicitation .......................................................................................................................... 9 2.2.1 Klaudy’s Explicitation Typology ................................................................................... 9 2.3.1 Explicitation Hypothesis............................................................................................... 12 2.3.2 CTS Studies on Explicitation ....................................................................................... 13 2.4 Pym's Risk Management Theory ........................................................................................ 15 Chapter 3 Methodology ................................................................................................................ 18 3.1 Corpus Selection ................................................................................................................. 18 3.3 Explicitation Typology........................................................................................................ 25 3.4 Concordance Tool ............................................................................................................... 28 3.4.1 Testing for Statistical Significance ............................................................................... 30 Chapter 4 Findings ........................................................................................................................ 33 4.1 Explicitation at the intra-sentential level ............................................................................. 33 4.1.1 Verb+That-Clause ........................................................................................................ 33 v.

(7) 4.1.2 Conditional Conjunctions ............................................................................................. 38 4.1.3 Parallel Conjunctions .................................................................................................... 42 4.1.4 Causal Conjunctions ..................................................................................................... 44 4.1.5 Temporal Conjunctions ................................................................................................ 47 4.1.6 Contrastive Conjunctions ............................................................................................. 49 4.2 Explicitation at the inter-sentential level ............................................................................. 51 4.2.1 Transitional words and phrases for cause and effect .................................................... 52 4.2.2 Transitional words and phrases for contrast ................................................................. 54 4.2.3 Transitional words and phrases for supplementary information .................................. 58 4.2.4 Transitional words for priority ..................................................................................... 61 4.3 Summary of Findings & Discussion ................................................................................... 63 Chapter 5 Discussion & Conclusion ............................................................................................. 66 5.1 Summary and discussion ..................................................................................................... 66 5.2 Limitations of the Study ...................................................................................................... 67 5.3 Suggestions for Future Research ......................................................................................... 68 References ..................................................................................................................................... 69 Appendix ....................................................................................................................................... 73 Appendix I - List of judgments used in the corpus ................................................................... 73 Appendix II - Detailed list of findings in this study................................................................ 102. vi.

(8) List of Figures Figure 1 - AntConc’s User Interface ............................................................................................. 29. vii.

(9) List of Tables Table 1 - Profile of corpus used in this study ............................................................................... 23 Table 2 - Connectives in this study ............................................................................................... 27 Table 3 - Contingency Table for Log-likelihood Test .................................................................. 30 Table 4 - Number of occurrences of "verb+that-clause" being used in the corpus ...................... 36 Table 5 - More examples of “Verb+That Clause” used at the intra-sentential level .................... 37 Table 6 - Number of occurrences of conditional conjunctions being used in the corpus ............. 40 Table 7 - More examples of conditional conjunctions used at the intra-sentential level .............. 41 Table 8 - Number of occurrences of parallel conjunctions being used in the corpus ................... 43 Table 9 - More examples of parallel conjunctions used at the intra-sentential level .................... 44 Table 10 - Number of occurrences of causal conjunctions being used in the corpus ................... 45 Table 11 - More examples of causal conjunctions used at the intra-sentential level .................... 46 Table 12 - Number of occurrences of temporal conjunctions being used in the corpus ............... 48 Table 13 - More examples of temporal conjunctions used at the intra-sentential level ............... 48 Table 14 - Number of occurrences of contrastive conjunctions being used in the corpus ........... 49 Table 15 - More examples of contrastive conjunctions used at the intra-sentential level ............ 50 Table 16 - Number of occurrences of transitional words and phrases for cause and effect being used in the corpus.......................................................................................................................... 53 Table 17 - More examples of transitional words and phrases for cause and effect used at the inter-sentential level ...................................................................................................................... 54 Table 18 - Number of occurrences of transitional words and phrases for contrast being used in the corpus ...................................................................................................................................... 55 Table 19 - More examples of transitional words and phrases for contrast used at the intersentential level .............................................................................................................................. 56. viii.

(10) Table 20 - Number of occurrences of transitional words and phrases for supplementary information being used in the corpus ............................................................................................ 59 Table 21 - More examples of transitional words and phrases for supplementary information used at the inter-sentential level ............................................................................................................ 60 Table 22 - Number of occurrences of transitional words and phrases for priority being used in the corpus ............................................................................................................................................ 62 Table 23 - More examples of transitional words and phrases for priority used at the intersentential level .............................................................................................................................. 63 Table 24 - Table of summarised findings by category ................................................................. 64. ix.

(11) Chapter 1: Introduction The Judiciary of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) of the People's Republic of China regularly translates selected Chinese judgments of legal significance into English and makes it available on their website alongside other English judgments. The quality of these translated judgments provides a firm foundation for the creation of a comparable corpus that we can study, to determine the nature of translational characteristics in legal texts, as well as the magnitude of such characteristics in translations when compared to actual English texts. Using a corpus-based approach, we looked at explicitation, a much studied "universal" of translation, and sought to understand and determine the extent of its presence under a legal backdrop.. 1.1 Research Rationale The right conditions or combination of elements should be present, and at the right time, for any particular paper to be written. Explicitation studies might not exist in their current form had Vinay (1958) not coined the term decades ago, or had Baker (1993) and Kulka (1998) not proposed the study of translation universals and the explicitation hypothesis. The same could be said about the study of corpora and legal translation, both aided greatly by the advent of technology, and perhaps made possible in the case of the former. Given these factors, this paper was written in the belief that this was a good time for combining these topics into a focal point of study. In my opinion, there are a few main reasons why a corpus-based study of explicitation in legal translation is appropriate at this point in time. Firstly, we have the availability of an extensive collection of translated legal judgments on the Hong Kong Judiciary's website, which 1.

(12) are found alongside other judgments written in English. The presence of these texts makes it easy for us to construct a proper comparable corpus, one made up of two sub-corpora that share very similar content. The following sub-chapter provides a more in-depth description of Hong Kong's legal system and the Hong Kong Judiciary.. 1.1.1 Language and Translation in Hong Kong's Legal System Signed in 1984 between the United Kingdom and the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the Sino-British Joint Declaration guaranteed the continuation of Hong Kong’s capitalist system, including its legal system, for the next 50 years after the island’s handover to the PRC in 1997. Chapter 1, Article 5 of The Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China (1997), which is the constitutional document of Hong Kong, states that:. The socialist system and policies shall not be practised in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, and the previous capitalist system and way of life shall remain unchanged for 50 years. (Cap 1, art 5). This meant that, although essentially a part of the PRC, the principle of "One Country, Two Systems" allows Hong Kong to practise a high degree of autonomy as a Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). An integral component of this autonomy is Hong Kong's unique legal system, a legacy derived from its status as a British colony. Hong Kong’s judiciary. 2.

(13) exists under this system and operates independently of the executive and legislative organs of Hong Kong. Owning to its unique history, Hong Kong's judiciary provides an ideal backdrop for the study of explicitation in legal translation. In its days as a British colony (1841-1941, 1945-1997), English was originally the sole official language in Hong Kong until 1974 when the Official Languages Ordinance (1974) was enacted. This ordinance allowed for the use of Chinese in communication between the government and public, which naturally included the use of said language in court proceedings. The Official Languages Ordinance (1974) states that:. (1) The English and Chinese languages are declared to be the official languages of Hong Kong for the purposes of communication between the Government or any public officer and members of the public and for court proceedings. (Amended 51 of 1995 s.2) (2) The official languages possess equal status and, subject to the provisions of this Ordinance, enjoy equality of use for the purposes set out in subsection (1). (§ 3). Since both Chinese and English hold equal status as official languages on the island, the judgments published by the judiciary may be written in either Chinese or English, with some important ones being subsequently translated into the other language (Chinese to English, or English to Chinese). This is particularly apparent with key judgments in Chinese given the large number of Chinese-to-English translations that can be found on the Hong Kong Judiciary's Legal Reference System and the Judiciary of HKSAR.. 3.

(14) The translated judgments are translated by the Judgment Translation Unit of the Judiciary (HKSAR) and subjected to a vetting process carried out by legal professionals. At the end of every translated judgment, the names of the translation party and vetting party are always indicated. When discovered, translation errors in the texts are also promptly corrected in the published judgments. Readers are also informed of the translation error via the publishing of a corrigendum, which clearly indicates which parts of the judgment itself were amended due to translation errors. I have covered these translation processes in brief to underscore the stringent standards practised by the Hong Kong Judiciary. And with this level of attention given to the quality of judgment translations comes a great opportunity to construct a comparable corpus consisting of judgments originally written in English on one side and Chinese judgments translated into English on the other.. 1.1.2 Explicitation The next major point to discuss is explicitation. Explicitation has been posited as a "universal" of translation, a phenomenon inherent to the very nature of translation itself. Thus as a research topic, legal translation provides a good subject for research since it could serve as a "contrast subject" of sorts when it comes to explicitation. This is because explicitation phenomena might manifest differently depending on the text type in question. To explain this, consider a study on tourist information like Olohan and Baker (2000), which produced findings that indicated a strong tendency towards explicitation in English translated from German, as opposed to actual English texts. Given that tourist information, compared to legal texts, is likely to be written in a more colloquial manner and focused on 4.

(15) readability, would the kinds of explicitation found in this genre be applicable to legal texts? The same is true for other genres as well when compared to legal translation. Since few studies on explicitation in a legal environment had been conducted in the past, it would make sense to explore this field and thereby help expand the scope and comprehensiveness of explicitation studies. Based on the concept of explicitation, the Explicitation Hypothesis was proposed by Blum-Kulka and it postulates a high level of cohesive explicitness in translated texts, as well as the idea that explicitation in translations is a universal phenomenon.. 1.1.3 Concordance Tools and Ease of Access to Resources With easier access to concordance tools like AntConc that are freely available, the use of corpora in academic studies will become increasingly common, and this trend will be further aided by the availability of various types of corpora on the web. Corpora such as the British National Corpus (BNC) have been used in many papers in the linguistics and translation fields. Apart from actual corpora, various online resources may also be compiled into corpora. Although this would require much more time and effort, they allow for the construction of corpora that is relevant to specific fields. Unlike corpora like the BNC which was designed to represent the breadth of English usage rather, a manually constructed corpus offers more flexibility. The corpus used in this study is an example of a manually constructed corpus that serves to represent the forms of English and translated English found in legal writing.. 5.

(16) 1.2 Research Purpose and Questions The purpose of this paper is to study the extent of explicitation in translated legal texts, and whether such texts contain more explicitation or can be shown to be more explicitated when compared to non-translated legal texts; a corpus-based approach was adopted in this study, with AntConc being the primary tool used to analyse a manually constructed corpus consisting of legal judgments published by the Hong Kong Judiciary. More specifically, the study aims to explore the following questions: 1. In what ways do explicitation manifest in court judgments? 2. To what extent is explicitation more pronounced in translated English court judgments than in English court judgments? 3. Do the findings in this study provide strong enough evidence to support the Explicitation Hypothesis?. 1.3 Significance of Research This corpus-based study will provide some degree of empirical evidence for determining the validity of the Blum-Kulka’s (1986) Explicitation Hypothesis within the scope of legal translation and the Chinese/English language pair.. 1.4 Thesis Structure The paper comprises five main chapters that are further broken down into relevant subchapters. Here is a brief summary of the details that I will cover in each of these chapters. Chapter one launches the paper with an explanation of the motivations behind my efforts to put this paper together, including some background information on some key elements 6.

(17) of the paper. This will be followed by the purpose and questions of this research, where I will summarise, in a few points, the key aims in conducting this study. Chapter two covers past studies and papers on relevant topics, beginning with subchapters introducing us to corpus-based studies and the universals of translation. The chapter will then segue to literature on explicitation, which is broken down into non-corpus-based and corpus-based translations. Pym's risk management theory will also be touched on as well. Chapter three outlines various details pertaining to the selection, structure and size of the corpus used in this study, as well as the explicitation typology and keyword search criteria that were implemented. A sub-chapter will also cover the concordance tool used in the study. Chapter four discusses the study's findings, which is broken down into sub-chapters on "Verb+That-Clause", conjunctions used at the intra-sentential level (within a sentence), and transitional words and phrases at the inter-sentential level (between two sentences or more). A short summary is provided to round up the findings. Chapter five wraps up the paper with a discussion on the overall findings and significance of the study. The limitations of research and suggestions for future research will also be pointed out and discussed.. 7.

(18) Chapter 2 Literature Review This chapter will cover some of the past studies and papers that are relevant to this study. It begins with an introduction to corpus-based translation studies, followed by sections on explicitation, Klaudy’s explicitation typology (which provides a basic categorisation of the various forms of explicitation), and the Explicitation Hypothesis. We will then move on to corpus-based studies on explicitation that are considered to be highly relevant, before finishing the chapter with a discussion of Pym’s Risk Management Theory and its relevance to this study.. 2.1 Corpus-based Translation Studies (CTS) The concept of Corpus-based Translation Studies (CTS), was defined by Baker (1993) as a form of research that “enables translation scholars to uncover ‘the nature of translated text as a mediated communicative event’ through the investigation of what are known in the literature as universals of translation”. Instead of relying on handpicked examples from the texts, one can now opt for a quantitative approach by, for example, tallying the number of instances a studied phenomenon has occurred in the text, thus resulting in claims that can be considered to have more quantitative grounding, or perhaps even findings that would have remained unnoticed otherwise. CTS combines corpus linguistics and description translation studies into an approach that allows for the use of “the analytical tools of corpus linguistics to study the product and process of translation from a descriptive rather than a prescriptive point of view” (Laviosa 2002, p. 18). With respect to explicitation, a CTS approach allows us to study this phenomenon in a more comprehensive manner. We are not limited to picking a few examples from texts, and can. 8.

(19) instead analyse the entirety of a considerable chunk of text which should ideally serve as a good representation of the subset of a language.. 2.2 Explicitation The term "explicitation" was coined by Vinay and Darbelnet (1958), who defined explicitation as a “stylistic translation technique which consists of making explicit in the target language what remains implicit in the source language because it is apparent from either the context or the situation (ibid., p342)”. However, Becher (2011) pointed out some of the problems pertaining to this definition, of which the most important is its ambiguity. What exactly is explicitation? In his proposed definition, Becher interpreted this as “the verbalization of information that the addressee might be able to infer if it were not verbalized” (ibid., p17). This, in my opinion, offers a clearer benchmark for what qualifies as explicitation and provides a better benchmark for the forms of explicitation that we are looking at in this study. In simpler terms, this means that information within the context of a written text has been made clearer to a reader, even though the reader might have been able to infer the said information without this additional level of clarity. There have been several typologies proposed for explicitation, of which Klaudy’s is one of the most prominent, and the subject of the following subsection.. 2.2.1 Klaudy’s Explicitation Typology Klaudy (1998) classified explicitation into four sub-categories, namely: Obligatory Explicitation; Optional Explicitation; Pragmatic Explicitation; Translation-inherent Explicitation. Obligatory Explicitation: 9.

(20) Motivated by linguistic differences between the source and target languages that necessitate the addition of more information in the target language. E.g. "Brother" in English, in most circumstances, can only be translated into "弟弟" (younger brother) or "哥哥" (older brother). The first example illustrates how one must specify if a "brother" is younger or older if translated into Chinese from English. While some might argue that "兄弟" (brothers) could technically fit the bill, it is a word that carries slightly different connotations and often only applicable in other contexts, such as in the case of references to fraternal groups. E.g. "To be" in English can only be translated into either "ser" or "estar" in Portuguese (also applicable to Spanish). For instance “I am Brazilian” when translated into Portuguese is “Eu sou brasileiro”, in which the verb “ser” is used instead of “estar”. The second example serves as an example of how grammatical differences between two languages can result in more explicitation in the target language. When translating "To be" from English into Spanish or Portuguese, a translator must identify the correct verb form, which is either "ser" (for more intrinsic, permanent characteristics) or "estar" (for conditions and states of a more temporal nature). Optional Explicitation: Motivated by stylistic differences between two languages E.g. "我國" (our country) is usually not directly translated, instead the name of the country in question is used. If the country in question is Taiwan, "我國的政策" (our country) may be translated as "Taiwan's policy". 10.

(21) Pragmatic Explicitation: Motivated by differences in common knowledge possessed by the source language and target language readers. E.g. "珠三角" in Chinese is usually translated as Pearl River Delta. E.g. "The Esplanade" "Pearl River Delta" is the preferred choice when writing in English, which could be considered a form of pragmatic explicitation since the most common Chinese term for it, "珠三角", does not contain the word "river". "River" is added, understandably as a means of helping English readers to immediately identify the term as a river-based geographical term. On the other hand, most Chinese readers would already have knowledge of this since the term is used often by the Chinese media. Translation-inherent Explicitation: In Becher’s paper on explicitation, he has noted that, while Klaudy had provided plenty of examples of obligatory, optional and pragmatic explicitation, she did not provide any for translation-inherent explicitations, perhaps due to the difficulties of finding proper examples, which was a problem that Becher also encountered (Becher, 2011, p.23). This illustrates the difficulty of defining and finding supporting evidence for the existence of translation-inherent explicitations, hence a lot more explicitation-related research has to be conducted before any conclusive findings can be made.. 11.

(22) 2.3.1 Explicitation Hypothesis With the emergence of the explicitation concept came Blum-Kulka's Explicitation Hypothesis. The Explicitation Hypothesis postulates an increased level of cohesive explicitness in the target text, as was discovered by Blum-Kulka (1986) when a discourse analysis was carried out on translations from English to French. Blum-Kulka goes further to claim that explicitation could be a universal translation strategy not limited to any language pairs, and in her own words:. The process of interpretations performed by the translator on the source text might lead to a TL [target language] text which is more redundant than the source text. This redundancy can be expressed by a rise in the level of cohesive explicitness in the TL text. This argument may be stated as “the explicitation hypothesis”, which postulates an observed cohesive explicitness from SL [source language] to TL texts regardless of the increase traceable to differences between the two linguistic and textual systems involved. It follows that explicitation is viewed here as inherent in the process of translation. (Blum-Kulka 2001: 300; qtd. in Pym 2005. p.2). In other words, Blum-Kulka is hypothesising that additional explicitation in translations is a universal phenomenon, a translational universal, and this applies regardless of language pair and cultural differences, hence the concept of a translation-inherent form of explicitation, which Kulka would later expand on with her typology for explicitation.. 12.

(23) 2.3.2 CTS Studies on Explicitation Given the strength and versatility of CTS, there have been many CTS-based studies on explicitation (Øverås, 1998; Olohan and Baker, 2000, 2001; Chen, 2004, 2007; Cai, 2007; Kuo, 2010; Duan, 2010; Li, 2014). Of these, I covered the ones I believe to be most relevant to this study. Øverås (1998) tested Blum-Kulka’s Explicitation Hypothesis by analysing a corpus consisting of English-to-Norwegian and Norwegian-to-English literary translations. All instances of explicitations and implicitations occurring in these sentences were manually identified by Øverås, with those of an obligatory nature being excluded from the study. 347 instances of explicitation and 149 instances of implicitation were discovered within the English-Norwegian sub-corpus, while 248 instances of explicitation and 76 instances of implicitation were discovered within the Norwegian-English sub-corpus. This led Øverås to conclude that the Explicitation Hypothesis has been confirmed in her study, and she also pointed out that the explicitation tendency was stronger in English-Norwegian translations than in Norwegian-toEnglish translations. Olohan and Baker (2000) looked at the optional use of the cohesive marker “that” being used in combination with the reporting verbs “say” and “tell” in translated and non-translated English texts. In this study, Olohan and Baker utilised the Translational English Corpus (TEC) and a comparable sample from the British National Corpus (BNC). Details on the exact composition of source languages were not specified in the study and the two corpora contained approximately 3.5 million words. Their studied revealed a higher volume of “that+verb” usage in translated English as opposed to non-translated English, which led them to propose that there were indeed “subliminal processes of explicitation in translation”. 13.

(24) Chen (2004, 2007) carried out studies on the use of connectives in English source texts, their corresponding Chinese translations, and comparable Chinese texts. Constructed by Chen himself, the English-Chinese Parallel Corpus (ECPC) contained the 2.5 million words that make up the source texts and translations used in his studies. Each English source text was accompanied by two Chinese translations, one translated by a Taiwanese (R.O.C) publisher and the other translated by a Chinese (P.R.C) publisher. For his reference Chinese corpus, Chen drew from the Sinica Corpus. The results of his studies indicated that, compared to non-translated texts, there is a greater tendency for connectives to be used in translated Chinese texts. Cai’s (2007) study was one which sought to determine the characteristics and existence of Chinese-to-English translations of journalistic texts. Made up of a sub-corpus of Chinese-toEnglish journalistic texts and another sub-corpus of non-translated journalistic texts, the corpus itself came close to 550,000 words. In the study, she scrutinised different variations of explicitation, including the use of "that" with reporting verbs (much like Olohan and Baker), connectives and transitional words and phrases. The results of the study indicated that explicitation occurred with a higher frequency in the translated texts, thus leading to her conclusion that the "explicitation feature indeed exists in Chinese-to-English translations". Cai also added a qualitative component to her study with the implementation of a survey. The results from the survey, in which 33 native English speakers partook, indicated that readers did indeed feel that explicitation in translated texts facilitated comprehensibility. Li's (2014) study utilised an English-Chinese parallel corpus consisting of roughly 260,000 words to examine explicitation patterns. The parallel corpus (termed by Li as the Parallel Corpus of Scientific American) was made up of a sub-corpora of non-translated English 14.

(25) texts from the Scientific American and a sub-corpora of translated Chinese texts from the same magazine. The research findings from this study showed that there were various types of explicitation patterns in the PCSA, which helped support the validity of the Explicitation Hypothesis in the context of English-to-Chinese translations of popular science texts. Although the literature that we have covered seems to indicate a wealth of evidence in support of the Explicitation Hypothesis, we should nevertheless remain cautious. Most of these studies are focused on specific types of texts such as journalistic or scientific texts, which means that there is still room for more exploration with regard to the explicitation phenomenon. Since few studies out there have examined explicitation specifically in the field of legal translation, this is an area worth more scrutiny should we desire to expand the scope of explicitation studies.. 2.4 Pym's Risk Management Theory Pym (2005) proposed a theory and framework of risk management as a possible explanation for the occurrence of explicitation during the process of translation. Pym’s position is that translators face the risk of “undesirable outcomes” that often manifest in the form of soured relationship with the people they work with and perhaps events such as the loss of paid work. In response to this, translators may be inclined to err on the side of caution and pick an explicitation-oriented translation strategy to avoid such risks. This is further substantiated by Pym’s (2000) opinion that translation can be seen as an act of cooperation, in which mutual benefits are sought by the parties involved. Given that a translator is almost always a cross-cultural communicator, it is reasonable to assume that he or she would want to avoid misunderstandings arising from the lack of information in the translated message. Suppose the communicating party is seeking to communicate its message with clarity, 15.

(26) the party receiving the message wants to understand said message fully, and the translator wants to be recognised as one who is competent in his or her roles; in this situation, it is completely understandable if the translator chooses to an explicitation-oriented strategy since this would maximise the probability that all these “benefits” can be achieved. From a psychological perspective, Pym, channelling the position of Chesterman (2004), is of the opinion that translators put themselves in the shoes of a reader and view their own translations from a reader’s perspectives. Since a translator is always the first reader of his or her own translation, much like an explorer cutting a path through an uncharted piece of territory, he or she would be inclined to place down “markers” that serve to provide clearer information on the path, and thus make the reading experience a smoother one for readers. It is also interesting to note that Pym also cautioned against proclaiming that explicitation is a translation universal, believing that other factors also play a part in influencing translation strategies. All these points are very applicable to the translation of legal judgments, as we know that any mistakes in the translations of such texts are corrected promptly and require a separate corrigendum notice to be issued. Clearly, the Hong Kong Judiciary takes such incidents very seriously. While the majority of these corrigendum mistakes tend to be factual mistakes (e.g. 2012 written as 2013 in the translation) as opposed to grammatical errors, disagreements over the tone of a message or the lack of emphasis on certain aspects of a sentence that the vetting party believed to be necessary, it remains likely that translators are faced with a high degree of stress over the possibility and consequences of making mistakes. Under such circumstances, it is not a far stretch to imagine that a translator would take all precautions to ensure that all information 16.

(27) within the source text is represented clearly and “beyond the shadow of any reasonable doubt” in the target text. Moreover, the translator may consider the position of his or her readers, who would most likely be people involved in the legal field, such as judges, lawyers, law school students and other legal professionals. Since these people are probably not reading these judgments for enjoyment, a translator may prioritise the clarity of information over other factors that may influence his or her translation strategy.. 17.

(28) Chapter 3 Methodology In this paper, we are studying various forms of explicitation by building a comparable corpus and using corpus processing tools to analyse it. The aim of this chapter is to explain, in a clear and easily understandable manner, the thought process and rationale behind the way this study was structured, as well as the resources that went into it. For methodology, we will cover: corpus selection; corpus design; typology and keyword search criteria; and corpus processing and concordance tools.. 3.1 Corpus Selection Corpora come in many forms, and it is only through careful selection that we can find the ideal corpus to suit a specific study. Much has already been written about the different types of corpora which exist out there and how we should categorise them, some of which are touched on briefly in the paper. Baker (1995) has said that there can be many ways to categorise corpora depending on the characteristics of the texts being used, this includes distinguishing between: general language and restricted domain texts; written and spoken language; typicality in terms of ranges of sources and genres; geographical limit or scope; monolingual, bilingual or multilingual corpora. Another commonly cited typology for corpora is Laviosa's (2002) four level classification system and typology for corpora used in translation studies, which cover aspects such as time span, register, presence of specialised language, number of languages and mediums of communication. This allows for highly detailed profiles to be drawn up for any corpus, which. 18.

(29) will therefore facilitate future comparisons between the corpora used in various studies. The specific details on the four levels are as follows: Level 1 Coverage: Full texts (unabridged texts); Samples (Parts of texts selected based on a set of criteria); Mixed (full and sample); Monitor (full texts that are reviewed and updated regularly) Time Span: Synchronic (texts created within a relatively limited period of time); Diachronic (texts created over a relatively long period of time) Register: General (texts written in non-specialised language, e.g. general news articles; Terminological (texts written in specialised language, e.g. legal statutes, medical research papers) Number of languages: Monolingual (texts made up of only one language); Bilingual (texts made up of two languages; Multilingual (texts made up of more than two languages) Language: English, Chinese, Japanese, etc. Mediums of communication: Written (texts written primarily to be read, e.g. newspaper articles); Spoken (texts transcribed from speech or texts written primarily to be spoken, e.g. collection of transcribed political speeches, film scripts); Mixed (written + spoken) Level 2 19.

(30) Monolingual Corpus: Single (all texts in one language only); Comparable (one translational monolingual subcorpus and one non-translational monolingual sub-corpus, both of which should be constructed based on the same principles, e.g. one sub-corpus consisting of English texts and one sub-corpus consisting of Chinese-to-English texts, both of which should be from the same or similar genres) Bilingual Corpus: Parallel (texts in one language and their translations in another language. E.g. English texts and their English-to-Chinese translations); Comparable (two sets of texts in two different languages, texts should be from the same or similar genres, e.g. English texts and Chinese texts) Multilingual Corpus: Parallel (texts in a range of different languages and their translations in other languages); Comparable (texts in a range of different languages) Level 3 Single Corpus: Translational (translated texts in one language, e.g. corpus consisting of English-toChinese texts); Non- translational (original texts in one language, e.g. corpus consisting of Chinese texts) Bilingual Parallel Corpus: Mono-directional (one or more texts in one language and their translations in another language); Bi-directional (one or more texts in language A and their translations in another language + one or more texts in language B and their translations in language A) Multilingual Parallel Corpus: 20.

(31) Mono-Source-Language (one or more texts in one language and their translations in more than one other language, e.g. English texts and their translations in Chinese and Japanese); BiSource-Language (one or more texts in two language and their translations in two other languages, e.g. English and Chinese texts and their translations in Japanese and Korean); MultiSource-Language (one or more texts in more than two language and their translations in more than two other languages.) Level 4 Translation Corpus: Mono-Source-Language (texts translated from a single language, e.g. a set of texts translated from English); Bi-Source-Language (texts translated from two languages, e.g. a set of texts translated from English and Chinese); Multi-Source-Language (texts translated from more than two languages, e.g. a set of texts from translated from English, Chinese and Japanese). 3.2 Breakdown of Corpus Characteristics for this Study Extracted from the Hong Kong Judiciary's online reference system, the corpus will primarily be monolingual and comparable, making it suitable for the study of explicitation. The judgments which make up the corpus can be found under the Legal Reference System (http://legalref.judiciary.gov.hk/lrs/common/ju/judgment.jsp) of the Hong Kong Judiciary's website (http://www.judiciary.gov.hk/en/index/). Available in the Legal Reference System are judgments written in Chinese and English, as well as judgments translated from Chinese into English. For judgments that were translated, both the source text Chinese and target text English. 21.

(32) are available for download. Although judgments translated from English into Chinese should theoretically be available on the website, none were found there. The corpus for this study was created from one translational sub-corpus (Chinese-toEnglish) and one non-translational sub-corpus (English). The translational corpus consists of 50 judgments written in English (173,910 English words) and the non-translational corpus is made up of 60 judgments translated from Chinese into English (177,583 English words). All of these judgments are judgments from Hong Kong's Court of Appeal of the High Court. To be more specific, these judgments are in fact reasons for judgments. A reason for judgment is the document which provides an explanation on why a particular court judgment was made. This is in contrast to an actual judgment, which would be much shorter since it is the official legal order issued by the court regarding the rights and liabilities of parties in a legal action or proceeding. But for the purpose of this study, these reasons for judgments shall be referred to as judgments for simplicity's sake. The following table outlines the basic profile of my corpus based primarily on Laviosa's four level typology.. 22.

(33) Table 1 - Profile of corpus used in this study Judgments written in Chinese (Traditional), Judgments written in English translated to English. 177,583 words/tokens. 173,910 words/tokens. Level 1: Full Text; Synchronic; Terminological*; Monolingual (English); Written. Level 2: Monolingual Comparable; Non-translational (English) + Translational (Chinese-to-English). Level 3: Single Non-translational (English) + Single Translational (Chinese-to-English). Level 4: Partial Mono-Source-Language (applicable to the translational sub-corpus). Level 1 Characteristics of Corpus Coverage: Although the texts used in this corpus do not represent the entirety of what is available on Hong Kong Judiciary website, each individual judgment contains fully complete, unabridged content that can stand alone on its own, hence I have classified the corpus as a full-text type corpus. Time span:. 23.

(34) When trying to decide if a corpus is synchronic or diachronic, it can be difficult to determine what exactly a “long span of time” is. With respect to judgments made in the Hong Kong legal system, I would consider the period after the handover of Hong Kong (control over Hong Kong and its territory was transferred by the United Kingdom back to China (represented by the People's Republic of China) in 1997) to be the starting period since Hong Kong's existing legal system essentially began at that point. With this in mind, the corpus is largely synchronic since the judgments I have selected consist mostly of judgments published only within the last five years. Size: These two sub-corpora, one translational and the other non-translational, are each made up of judgments ranging from 100 to 16000 English words. The translational and nontranslational sub-corpora consists of 50 and 60 judgments respectively. Register: Although one might assume that legal judgments would almost certainly be terminological-type texts as opposed to general-type ones, a closer inspection of the texts reveal that this is not necessarily the case. In fact, in a typical judgment, the details of incidents described are written in a fairly easy-to-read manner with only a reasonable amount of legal jargon, not unlike a more detailed and drawn out news report. A more "legal" style of writing occurs in the sections where a judge is explaining his or her rationale for giving judgments. Given this situation, I'm more inclined to consider the corpus as a mixed-nature corpus where register is concerned, with its texts leaning towards being terminological texts. 24.

(35) Language: The non-translational sub-corpus consists of judgments originally written in English, which is common in Hong Kong since its legal system has English designated as one of its two official languages. As for the translational sub-corpus, its content was originally written in traditional Chinese and then translated into English. Such translations were undertaken primarily as the judgments involved were deemed as important judgments. Mediums of communication: The judgments are written primarily to be read. Level 2/3 Characteristics of Corpus The corpus is primarily a monolingual comparable corpus made up of a single nontranslational corpus (English) and a single translation corpus (Chinese-to-English). Level 4 Characteristics of Corpus The corpus may be considered a partial mono-source-language corpus since the translational sub-corpus was translated into English from Chinese.. 3.3 Explicitation Typology There are many angles through which we can study explicitation, making it necessary for a proper typology to be established. With respect to explicitation, I will direct the focus of this study on the use of connectives, following a format rather similar to Cai's (2007), although the choice of words and phrases to be studied were modified to suit the needs of this study. We will be looking at three primary categories of connectives, namely the “Verb+That-Clause” pattern, conjunctions used at the intra-sentential level (within a single sentence), and transitional words. 25.

(36) and phrases used at the inter-sentential level. The following table lists the connectives that I have selected as my search criteria.. 26.

(37) Table 2 - Connectives in this study “Verb+That-Clause” Say + That (E.g. She say/said that…) Conjunctions used at the intra-sentential level . Conditional Relations although, if, as long as, though, even though, unless, what if, even if, only if. . Parallel Relations and. . Cause-effect Relations because, so that. . Temporal Relations when, while, as. . Contrastive Relations: but, yet, while. Transitional words and phrases used at the inter-sentential level . Cause-effect Relations thus, As a result, therefore. . Contrastive Relations but, by contrast, nevertheless, however, in comparison, on the other hand, on the contrary, yet. . Supplementary Relations: 27.

(38) in fact, in other words, moreover, and, in addition, besides, furthermore . Priority Relations: More Importantly. The nature of each sub-category in this table will be discussed in Chapter 4 Findings & Discussions.. 3.4 Concordance Tool The concordance tool that I used is AntConc, a freeware corpus analysis toolkit for concordance and text analysis purposes. The latest version of AntConc (as of February 2016), can be downloaded from its creator’s (Laurence Anthony) website (http://www.laurenceanthony.net/software/antconc/). The judgments, which are downloaded from the Hong Kong Judiciary's website as Word files, are then converted to "txt" format before being uploaded to AntConc for analysis. The upload of files can be done these few simple steps as follows: 1. Click on the AntConc application icon to open it (No installation is needed after downloading it from the website) 2. Click “File” 3. Under “File”, click “Open File(s)” and select the files that you wish to open. In this case, the files we need to open are the “txt” versions of the abovementioned judgments. It is recommended that you upload all of the “txt” files you need at one go to save on time instead of open each file one at a time.. 28.

(39) Once the judgments forming the corpus are uploaded onto AntConc, one may then proceed to search for key words and phrases in the corpus based on the search criteria and list of connectives as shown above. Figure 1 - AntConc’s User Interface. The figure above shows AntConc’s user interface, through which we can conduct searches for words and phrases in the corpus. In the figure, the panel on the extreme left shows a list of all the files (comprising the corpus) that have been uploaded onto AntConc. In this case, I have uploaded the entirety of my translational corpus (Chinese-to-English corpus) onto AntConc for analysis. AntConc’s search function allows the program to sieve through the full list of uploaded files for sentences that contain the search term. Depending on the nature of the words and phrases in question, we may have to check each individual sentence to determine their relevance. For example and as shown in the figure, a search for sentences containing the word “while” had just been conducted, but within the context 29.

(40) of this study, I will still have to differentiate between the occurrences of “while” which are relevant to temporal and contrastive relations respectively, and ignore the ones that bear no relevance to the study (such as “for a while). This means that a certain degree of manual work is still required.. 3.4.1 Testing for Statistical Significance It would be impossible to make any claims about the frequency of explicitation simply by looking at absolute numbers. Thus for the purpose of testing for statistical significance in this study, I have decided to use the log-likelihood test to ensure that all claims are backed by statistical testing. The log-likelihood test was chosen for its simplicity in application. To calculate log-likelihood, we first construct a contingency table similar to the one shown below. Table 3 - Contingency Table for Log-likelihood Test. Number of Occurrences of. Translational Chinese-to. Non-translational English. English Corpus. Corpus. 159. 140. 177,583 words/tokens. 173,910 words/tokens. “Say+That” Explicitation Pattern Corpus Size Log-likelihood (LL) value. 0.84 (+) *In this study “+” signifies that there were more occurrences of a particular explicitation pattern in the translational corpus 30.

(41) The log-likelihood value is then generated using Xu’s (2009) log-likelihood ratio calculator, which provides both the log-likelihood value and its corresponding p-value. The pvalue represents the probability that we would obtain a result equal to or more extreme than what was actually observed for a particular hypothesis. A p-value of 0.05 means that this probability is 5%, and p < 0.05 is generally accepted as the threshold value for statistical significance. Any higher than that (e.g. 0.06) and a set of results would generally be considered as statistically insignificant. The next point to note is that the log-likelihood value is inversely related to the p-value, so a higher log-likelihood value is equivalent to a lower p-value. To prove that a particular explicitation phenomenon is more pronounced in the Chinese-English corpus from a statistical viewpoint, the log-likelihood value must be at least 3.84, or equivalent to a p-value of 0.05. In terms of log-likelihood, any value lower than 3.84 is equivalent to p > 0.05, which means that the results should not be considered statistically significant. The test was applied to all of the explicitation phenomena that we are covering in this paper, with the calculation being done using Xu’s (2009) log-likelihood ratio calculator. The table above shows an example of how this would be done. A contingency table like the one above is created and the figures would be computed to obtain a log-likelihood value. Suppose we find out that there were 159 occurrences of the “say+that” pattern in the translational corpus consisting of 177,583 words, which is more than the 140 observed in the non-translational one consisting of 173,910 words. To determine if this is statistically significant, we key in the relevant figures (total number of occurrences in translational corpus; total number of occurrences 31.

(42) in non-translational corpus; total number of words in translation corpus; total number of words in non-translational corpus) and end up obtaining a log-likelihood value of 0.84, which is lower than the threshold value of 3.84, hence rendering the results for this particular form of explicitation statistically insignificant.. 32.

(43) Chapter 4 Findings 4.1 Explicitation at the intra-sentential level The intra-sentential level covers the connectives used to explicitate information within a sentence. In this section, we will cover the “Verb+That-Clause”, “Conditional Relations”, “Parallel Relations”, “Cause-effect Relations”, “Temporal Relations” and “Contrastive Relations”.. 4.1.1 Verb+That-Clause The first form of explicitation we are looking at is the use of "that" after a verb and preceding a clause (hereinafter referred to as the ""verb+that-clause"). This is in fact grammatically optional in some situations, yet it is often used in a sentence to promote clarity. As mentioned by Pym, translators are also readers. If we imagine the transition between two clauses as a border, the use of “that” is akin to the translator putting up a signage to mark this “border crossing”. While the average reader is likely to notice this “border” with or without a marker, having one always helps. The following sentences shows an example of the "verb+that-clause" being used.. E.g. The defence witnesses said that the defendant was rather simple-minded and was too ready to believe what other people said. E.g. That some of the payments were not made strictly in accordance with the agreement did not mean that the agreement had never existed. 33.

(44) For the first sentence, "said that the defendant......" could have been shortened to "said the defendant......" and the sentence itself would still be grammatically sound. The same holds true for the second sentence, which would retain the entirety of its original meaning even if one were to slightly modify it into "did not mean the agreement had......" Most readers would most likely be able to understand these sentences' content, with or without the presence of "that" in these sentences. In addition to the preference for clarity, the use of "that" also slightly alters the tone of these sentences. Fowler's Modern English Usage raises this point, mentioning that the use of "that" in this context also "depends partly on whether the tone is elevated or colloquial". In simpler terms, this means that the use of “that” in a sentence tends to give it a more formal stature. Given that legal texts and judgments are generally considered to be very formal texts, one could argue that a translator, just to be on the safe side and to avoid any criticism that his or her translation is too informal in a legal context, would be inclined to explicitate their translations using “that”. Whether "that" can actually be omitted after a verb and still remain grammatically correct, is largely dependent on the verb in question. There are situations when the addition of a "thatclause" is more or less necessary to ensure clarity from both grammatical and practical perspectives. This is particularly relevant in long sentences, such as the one below, where the use of "that" would be appropriate.. E.g. The issues before the jury were: whether they could draw the only reasonable inference that the applicant knew that there was drug in the plastic bag in question and that the applicant had 34.

(45) the intention and ability to deal with the drug; and, if the jury found that the applicant was in possession of the drug, whether the applicant was in possession of it for the purpose of trafficking.. From a practical perspective, given that the verb "found" carries more than one meaning, it makes sense to follow it with "that" to avoid any ambiguity. Had the sentence been written as "the jury found that the applicant was in possession of the drug", a less attentive reader might mistake "the applicant" as the object of the verb "stressed", which would create some degree of confusion and the need to re-read the sentence. While it is probably unlikely for the sentence to be misunderstood, the addition of "that" is still the prudent choice in this case. Moreover, and perhaps more importantly, omitting "that" in the above sentence is wrong as well. This raises an important question. How do we go about studying the "verb+that-clause" explicitation pattern? If we were to include every verb preceding a "that", there is a good chance we might mistakenly raise examples where "that" is in fact required grammatically, and not because the translator made a conscious choice to explicitate the sentence. This is why I have decided to focus the study of "verb+that-clause" on verbs where omission is clearly optional. Thus, instead of trying to cover every verb, I have decided to focus on just the verb "say". This was tested by doing AntConc search for "that-clause" patterns which follow the verb "say" (includes "say", "says" and "said"). "Say" was chosen since it is one of the most common verbs on which the "that-clause" pattern could easily be applied to without the risk of any debate over the grammatical necessity of “that”.. 35.

(46) Table 4 - Number of occurrences of "verb+that-clause" being used in the corpus Number of occurrences in Translational Corpus. Number of occurrences in Non-translational Corpus. 159. Log-likelihood Value. 140. 0.84 (+). (+) More occurrences in translation corpus (-) More occurrences in non-translational corpus. The search revealed that the "say+that-clause" occurred, in absolute terms, just slightly more frequently in the translated corpus, with 159 instances of usage as opposed to the 140 times it turned up in the non-translated corpus. When taking the size of the corpus into consideration this is equivalent to an LL value of 0.84. In other words, this difference is not statistically significant enough for one to state that a translator is more prone to using the "say+that-clause" pattern to explicitate translated information. But why would a translator not be overwhelmingly inclined to use this pattern more frequently? Is he or she not fearful of criticisms that a translation is too informal? As much as this might seem counter-intuitive at first, the formal nature of legal writing might possibly serve as one reason why the difference was not all that significant. As I have already brought up when I quoted Fowler's Modern English Usage, “that” tends to elevate the tone of a sentence to a more formal register. In the context of legal writing, it is not unsurprising that the frequency of the "say+that-clause" remains somewhat consistent, since even the legal professionals writing in English would probably prefer to maintain a more formal tone for these legal judgments. 36.

(47) Interestingly, there are also occasions when it might actually be preferable to omit "that" as well, which could be seen as a form of implicitation. This often occurs when there are too many "that"s in a sentence, such as the one below.. E.g. The judge should direct the jury that they must be sure that the defendant had the intent to cause grievous bodily harm before they can convict the defendant....... But considering that such examples are rare, and also that their appropriateness can be difficult to gauge in an objective manner, this observation will not be studied within the scope of this paper (but may possibly become part of a bigger, expanded study in the future).. Table 5 - More examples of “Verb+That Clause” used at the intra-sentential level 1. However, in the video recorded interview on 23 March 2012 (“video recorded interview”), he said that it took place almost one week or one to two weeks before the case and that he could not recall the exact time;. 2. Under caution, she said that she had been asked by her boyfriend Terry (a black man) to go to Kuala Lumpur to get goods samples.. 3. He knew his character, and the two of them would go out and dine together on weekends; he only heard Huang Chengjia say that these deposits were refunds for his unsuccessful mining business in the Philippines; he felt too embarrassed to ask Huang Chengjia who these four persons (i.e. three from Hong Kong and one from Macau) were; he only produced to the court a one-page document, i.e. a copy of the business registration document of “Garnon 37.

(48) Company Limited” as proof of its actual trading. 4. Although the psychiatrists pointed out in the reports that her mental health condition would be improved with the speedy resolution of the divorce litigation, the doctors did not say that she would fully recover from depression as a result of such improvement.. 4.1.2 Conditional Conjunctions Conditional conjunctions, as the name suggests, are used to clarify conditions in a sentence. They can be considered a form of explicitation as conditional conjunctions are not always necessary within a sentence, but do help to make it clearer. Take the following as an example.. E.g. Exercise every day and you will be fit E.g. If you exercise every day, you will be fit.. While the contents expressed in the above sentences are virtually identical, the first sentence requires a reader to apply a small degree of inference to come to the conclusion that he or she would have directly made reading the second one. It is also more strongly implied that the condition mentioned in the first part of the sentence constitutes the sole or primary condition for the outcome mentioned in the second part of the sentence. In other words, one is more likely to infer from the second sentence that exercising is the sole or primary way to become fit.. 38.

(49) Since there are various words and phrases that may serve the role of a conditional conjunction, we will only be looking at a selected list of them. For the study of conditional conjunctions, I used a conjunction list identical to Cai's, namely: although, if, as long as, even though, unless, what if, even if, only if. Here are some examples of conditional conjunctions being used in the corpus.. E.g. She emphasized that if she had a conviction record, the future of her daughters would be adversely affected and that therefore she decided to resume her application for leave to appeal against conviction in order that justice would be done.. E.g. She emphasized that receiving a conviction record would adversely affect the future of her daughters and that therefore she decided to resume her application for leave to appeal against conviction in order that justice would be done. (Possible alternative translation). The first sentence above is the actual translation, while the second sentence is a possible alternative created by me. Even though both sentences are essentially the same content-wise, the use of "if" does stress the conditional relationship between "having a conviction record" and "the adverse effect on her daughters", more so than the suggested translation. In this sense, the translator could be said to have opted for a more explicit sentence to outline this conditional relationship.. 39.

(50) Table 6 - Number of occurrences of conditional conjunctions being used in the corpus Conditional conjunction. Number of occurrences in Translational Corpus. Number of occurrences in Non-translational Corpus. Log-likelihood Value. although. 105. 95. 0.31 (+). if. 281. 304. 1.45 (-). as long as. 8. 2. 3.73 (+). though. 1. 1. 0.00. even though. 6. 4. 0.36 (+). unless. 10. 9. 0.03 (+). what if. 1. 0. -. even if. 56. 36. 3.97 (+). only if. 5. 4. 0.09 (+). Conditional Total. 473. 455. 0.07 (+). (+) More occurrences in translation corpus (-) More occurrences in non-translational corpus. Based on the selected list, the total occurrences of conditional conjunctions found in the translated and non-translated corpus are 473 and 455 respectively, equivalent to a log-likelihood of 0.07, which is far lower than the required 3.84. When we break down the data for conditional conjunctions, we see that only the connective “even if” was able to achieve a statistically significant difference in the translational corpus. In the case of the connective “if”, the tables 40.

(51) were even turned around in terms of absolute numbers as there were more occurrences of “if” in the non-translational corpus instead. Given these figures, there is little evidence to conclude that conditional conjunctions were used more frequently in the translation of judgments relative to non-translated judgments written in English.. Table 7 - More examples of conditional conjunctions used at the intra-sentential level 1. Also, although the applicant had already made full confession to the police in respect of all the charges, the trial judge was wrong to consider that he should not be entitled to some extra discount even when the prosecution evidence against him was not that strong.. 2. If the erroneous advice relied upon by the applicant relates to the nature or effect of the act of abandonment, the Notice of Abandonment will be regarded as a nullity.. 3. As long as the defendant, acting with premeditation and deliberately, has taken advantage of the victim’s negligence and stolen property placed next to him or her, then there is no difference between such a theft offence and the offence of “pick-pocketing” in terms of gravity.. 4. We agree that even without the assistance of the applicant, the police could still find out the address of “Mr Tong” though it might take a longer time.. 5. “Members of the Review Body, including the Chairman and the Deputy Chairmen are not liable in law for any act done or not done by them in relation to the exercise or performance or the purported exercise or performance of the Review Body's duties, functions and powers unless it is proved that the act was done or omitted to be done dishonestly or in bad faith.” 41.

(52) 6. A lie could amount to corroboration only if the jury were satisfied that the lie constituted an attempt by the defendant to lie his way out of conviction not only on the assault charge but also on the rape charge.. 7. Even if someone subsequently obtained these documents and produced them to the court, as he had not looked at or received them at the material times, they could not have affected the facts or circumstances as he knew or believed them at the material times.. 8. The Deputy Judge was of the view that this case happened in a public place, and that even though there were not a large number of pedestrians at the material time, the commission of the offence in this well-known shopping area in Mongkok was an aggravating feature.. 4.1.3 Parallel Conjunctions Parallel conjunctions link two clauses together, allowing readers to more easily associate the two sets of information presented in them with each other. The most obvious example of this is "and", as seen in this sentence.. E.g. In our view, the above evidence indicates that the work ability of the plaintiff was impaired after the accident, and he had difficulties finding work after his employment was terminated. E.g. In our view, the above evidence indicates that the work ability of the plaintiff was impaired after the accident. He had difficulties finding work after his employment was terminated. (Possible alternative translation). 42.