A corpus-based study of nominalization in English translations of Chinese literary prose

Acorpus-basedstudyofnominalizationinEnglishtranslationsofChineseliterary............................................................................................................................................................

prose

YuHou

.......................................................................................................................................

YanshanUniversity,Qinhuangdao,China

Abstract

ThisstudyisdesignedtoanalyzetheuseofnominalizationinEnglishtranslationsofChineseliteraryprosebasedoneightEnglishtranslationsofChinesenovels.Itfollows‘Lees,R.(1963).TheGrammarofEnglishNominalizations.TheHague:Mouton’indefiningEnglishnominalizationasanominalizedtransformofafiniteverbalformand‘Mathesius,V.(1975).SelectedWritingsinEnglishandGeneralLinguistics.TheHague:Mouton’theoryof‘complexcondensationofthesentence’.ItdescribesEnglishnominalizationfromtheformal-syntacticlevelasadverbial,inthepositionsofsubjectandobject,condensingafiniteclausalstruc-ture.Inthequalitativeanalysis,variouseffectsoftheuseofnominalizationaredescribedbasedonthreeEnglishversionsoftheChineseclassicnovelHongLouMeng.Inthequantitativeanalysis,threegeneralpatternsoftheuseofnominal-izationarefoundintheeightEnglishtranslationsofChinesenovels:itispre-dominantlyusedasadverbial(asopposedtointhepositionsofobjectandCorrespondence:YuHou,Yanshan

subject),intheformofgerundivenominalization(asopposedtoderivedandUniversity,Qinhuangdaozero-derivednominalizations),andinthenarrative(asopposedtodialogues).In066004,Hebei,China.comparisonwithnominalizationusedinsomeEnglishnovels,itisfoundthatEmail:

nominalizationissignificantlymoreusedintheEnglishtranslationsofChinesehouyu@ysu.edu.cn

novelsatlarge.

.................................................................................................................................................................................

1Introduction

ofthetexttypeinwhichitappears.Inotherwords,themoreformalatexttypeis,themorefrequentlyitNominalizationisgenerallyregardedasoneofthewillbeused,andviceversa’.Duetothisstylisticmostwidelystudiedlinguisticphenomena.Englishnorm,itislessfrequentlyusedinlessformaltextnominalizationiscloselyrelatedtotexttypes.typessuchasthetexttypeofAccordingtoRadovanovic(2001,p.43–4),itHowever,it is not clear novels(ibid:76).

thereisnoknowingwhetherthisstylistic‘appear[s]moreoftenasastandardfeatureofnormappliestotheuseofEnglishnominalizationinsomespecialfunctionalstyles/registersoflanguagetranslatedliteraryprosebecausetherehasbeenuse,particularlyofthoselikepolitical,legal,admin-scarceempiricalresearchinthisregard.Therefore,istrative,journalistic,andscientific’.Wang(2003,p.thisstudyintendstoconductacorpus-basedde-74)pointedoutthat‘thefrequenciesofEnglishscriptiveandexplanatorystudyoftheuseofnom-nominalization英语的名物化和文章的正式程度有直接的关联。aredirectlyrelatedtotheformalness

inalizationinEnglishtranslationsofChineseliterary

LiteraryandLinguisticComputingßTheAuthor2013.PublishedbyOxfordUniversityPresson1of14

behalfofALLC.Allrightsreserved.ForPermissions,pleaseemail:journals.permissions@oup.comdoi:10.1093/llc/fqt023

Downloaded from http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/ at Shanghai International Studies University on November 14, 2013Y.Hou

proseworks.ForthereasonwhyChineseischosenasasourcelanguage,refertoSection2.

Thisarticleisstructuredasfollows.Section2givesanoverviewofthestudyofEnglishnominal-izationsoastolayatheoreticalfoundationforthepresentstudy.Section3introducesthetheoreticalframework,whereasSection4detailsthemethod-ologyinthestudy.Section5demonstratesvariouseffectsoftheuseofnominalizationinEnglishtrans-lation.Sections6–9dealwithquantitativeanalysesoftheuseofnominalizationinEnglishtranslationsofChineseliteraryproseworksandEnglishliteraryproseworks.Section10setsoutaconclusion.

2AnoverviewofthestudyofnominalizationinEnglish

Nominalizationisgenerallyconsideredasoneofthemostwidelystudiedlinguisticphenomena.Thede-velopmentofthetheoryofEnglishnominalization,toalargeextent,informsthewholeprocessofthedevelopmentofEnglishlinguistics.Majorlinguisticschoolshaveaddressed,todifferentdegrees,theissueofEnglishnominalizationintheirrepresenta-tiveworks.

Instructurallinguistics,theissueofEnglishnom-inalizationwasbroughttolightprimarilybythecon-tributionsofthePragueSchool(andmainlybyits

foundingfigureVile

´mMathesius).InhiscomparisonofmodernEnglishandmodernCzech,Mathesius(1975[1961])firstused‘complexcondensationofthesentence’tomeananintroductionintoasentenceofanominalelementorphrasereplacingthefiniteverbofasubordinateclauseandthusavoidingusingaclausalstructure.Hepointedoutthatthemostfre-quentlyusedsentencecondensersinEnglisharethepresentparticiple,infinitive,andgerund.

Radovanovic(1978)developedanelaboratemodelofMathesius’theoryandappliedittopredi-cationanalysis.HeelaboratedtheanalysisofEnglishnominalizationfromtheperspectiveofthesentence.Hefirstinvestigatedatthesemantic-syntacticlevelnominalizationasadverbial,actualizingawiderangeofmeanings(includingtemporal,causal,purposive,conditional,andconcessivemeanings),thenconsideredattheformal-syntactic

2of14

LiteraryandLinguisticComputing,2013

levelnominalizationinthepositionofsubject(asacondenserofnominal‘that’-clausesandadverbialclauses)andobject(asacondenseroffiniteclausalstructures),asanintegralpartofperiphrasticpredi-catestructures,asaconstituentmemberofthenominalpredicate,andasthebasicpredicationalnucleus(inabsoluteuse).

Casule(19)adaptedRadovanovic’selaboratemodelofMathesius’theoryandappliedittoanalyzethefunctioning,meaning,andstructureoftheverbalnoun(non-finiteverbalformsendingin‘-nje’)inthemodernMacedonianliterarylanguage,asoneoftherepresentativesoftheprocessofcondensationandnominalization.Hefoundthattheverbalnounisthecentral,highlyregular,andmostproductivecon-densedexponentoftheprocessofnominalization.FormorerecentapplicationsofMathesius’theory,seeDuris(2006)andJanigova(2007).Intransformational-generativelinguistics,whetherEnglishnominalizationbelongstopartofthesyntax[representedbyLees’(1963)transform-ationalapproach]ortopartofthelexicon[repre-sentedbyChomsky’s(1971)lexicalistapproach]usedtobeafamousdebate,althoughitisnowmostlytreatedaspartofthelexicon.Lees(1963),applyingthetransformationaltheoryputforwardbyChomsky(1957)totheanalysisofphrasesandsen-tences,assumedthatEnglishnominalizationisatransformationprocess.Ontheotherhand,Chomsky’s(1971)positionwasthatgerundivenominals(traditionallytreatedastheresultofin-flectionalmorphology)aretransformationallyderivedfromverbs,whilederivednominals(trad-itionallyregardedastheresultofderivationalmorphology)shoulddirectlyenterintothelexicon.Asarepresentativefigureincognitivelinguistics,Langacker(1991,p.22–50)madeaspecialinvesti-gationofEnglishnominalizationfromthreemainaspects:‘kinds’,‘periphrasis’,and‘predictability’.Inaddition,henoticedthesemanticandcognitivedifferencesbetweenadeverbalnoun(forexample,‘explosion’)anditsverbalform(forexample,‘explode’),althoughbothmaydescribethesameevent—‘Therewasanexplosion!’;‘someoneexploded’.AccordingtoLangacker(1987,p.90),‘explodeandexplosioncontrastsemanticallybecausetheyusedifferentimagestoconstructthesame

Downloaded from http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/ at Shanghai International Studies University on November 14, 2013conceptualcontent:explodeimposesaprocessualconstrualoftheprofiledevent,explosionportraysitasanabstractregion.Nominalizingaverbneces-sarilyendowsitwiththeconceptualpropertieschar-acteristicofnouns’.

Incomparisonwiththepreviouslinguisticschools,thesystemic-functionallinguisticschoolrepresentedbyHallidaycarriedoutamoresystem-aticandin-depthstudyofEnglishnominalizationinrelationtocontext.Halliday(1994,p.352)defineditas‘thesinglemostpowerfulresourceforcreatinggrammaticalmetaphor’.Itisamodemarkerofwrit-tenEnglishratherthanspokenEnglishinthesensethatwrittenEnglishischaracterizedby‘complexityinthenominalgroup’,whilespokenEnglishis‘markedbyintricacyintheclausecomplex’(Halliday,1987,p.71).

Empirically,therehasbeenlimitedresearchintotheuseofEnglishnominalizationintranslation,al-thoughthereareseveraldescriptivestudiesoftheuseofnominalizationinEnglish,suchasBiberetal.(1999)andWang(2003),andintranslationamongotherlanguages,suchasKonsalova(2007).AccordingtoBiberetal.(1999:322),thefrequenciesofcommonderivationalsuffixesusedtoformEnglishnominalizationsuchas‘-tion’,‘-ity’,‘-ism’,and‘-ness’aredifferentindifferenttexttypes.Specifically,‘-tion’,‘-ity’,and‘-ism’occur名物化并非mostfrequentlyinacademicwriting,followedby都是名词短theiroccurrencesinconversation,fiction,and语news,while‘-ness’occursmostfrequentlyinfiction,也指通过派followedbyitsoccurrenceinacademicwriting,生的方式产生的抽象名news,andconversation.BasedontwentyEnglish词textsineachofthefivetexttypes,Wang(2003)foundthattheuseofEnglishnominalizationdiffersgreatlyinthem.Specifically,itenjoysthehighestcoverageinthelegaltexttype(83.5%),followedbyitscoverageinscience(72.6%),advertisement(40.3%),novel(27.2%),andfairytale(0.7%).Intranslationstudies,totesttheexplicitationhypoth-esisonthemorpho-syntacticlevel,Konsalova(2007)examinedthetendencyintranslationtousemoreexplicitmodesofexpressionthanimplicitdevices.Incomparingthefrequenciesoffivetypesofmorphosyntacticstructures(includingfiniteverbsinmainclausesanddeverbativenouns)inoriginalCzechandGermantexts,shefoundthat

Acorpus-basedstudyofnominalization

Czechprefersmoreverbalmodesofexpression,whileGermanprefersmorenominalones.Next,herexaminationofexplicitatingshifts(suchasfromdeverbativenounstofiniteverbsinmainclauses)andimplicitatingshifts(suchasfromfiniteverbsinmainclausestodeverbativenouns)inbothGerman-to-CzechandCzech-to-Germantranslationdirectionsconfirmedtheexplicitationhypothesis,inthesensethatexplicitationexceedsimplicitationby40.6%inCzechtranslationsandby47.8%inGermantranslations.

Inviewofthestate-of-the-artofempiricalre-searchonEnglishnominalization,thisstudyintendstoconductacorpus-basedstudyoftheuseofnom-inalizationinEnglishtranslationsofChineseliteraryproseworksandcomparetheresultsofitsusewiththoseoftheuseofnominalizationinEnglishliteraryproseworks.ThereasonwhyChineseischosenasasourcelanguageisasfollows.Onetheonehand,nominalizationexistsnotonlyinEnglishbutalsoinmanyotherlanguagescloselyrelatedtoitsuchasFrench,German,andCzech.Choosinganyofthemasasourcelanguagemayinevitablyleadtotheresultthatnominalizationinasourcelanguagein-fluencestheuseofEnglishnominalizationintrans-lation.Ontheotherhand,asChineseandEnglishbelongtotworemarkablydifferentlanguagefamilieswithdifferentgrammaticalsystems,nomin-alizationintheChinesesourcelanguageisbynomeansafactortriggeringtheuseofEnglishnomin-alizationintranslation(seeexamplesinSection5).Inthissense,choosingChineseasasourcelanguagemakesthepresentstudymoreworthyandvaluable.

3Theoreticalframework

ThisstudyfollowsLees(1963)indefiningEnglishnominalizationasanominalizedtransformofafiniteverbalform.Threecategoriesofthenominal(NOM)serveinthisstudyasarepresentativeoftheprocessofnominalization,i.e.GerundiveNOM(GN),DerivedNOM(DN),andZero-derivedNOM(ZN).Nominalizedstructurescontainingeachofthethreetypesofnominalizationareexplainedbyaprocessofsyntacticderivationfromtheirexplicitsententialpredications.Incomparison

LiteraryandLinguisticComputing,2013

3of14

Downloaded from http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/ at Shanghai International Studies University on November 14, 2013Y.Hou

withtheirsententialpredications,nominalizedstruc-turesareimplicitintermsofsubject,object,verbalcategories(tense,aspect,voice,ormodality),andlo-gicalrelationsthattheirsententialcounterpartsmayrepresent.Inthecontextoftranslation,bothanomi-nalizedstructureanditscorrespondingfiniteclausalstructureconstitutethetranslator’schoice.

ThisstudyalsofollowsMathesius(1975)incon-sideringEnglishnominalizationoneofthemani-festationsofcomplexcondensationofthesentenceinthesensethattheNOMsinnominalizedstruc-turesintroducedintosentencescanreplacethefiniteverbsofsubordinateclauses.

4Methodology

BasedonMathesius’(1975)complexcondensationtheory,whichwassubsequentlyelaboratedbyscho-larssuchasRadovanovic(1978)andCasule(19),thisstudydescribedNOMsfromtheperspectiveofthesentenceasadverbial,condensingadverbialfiniteclauses[oftemporal(1),causal,purposive,conditional,andconcessivemeanings];inthepos-itionofsubject,condensingnominal‘that’-clauses(2)andadverbialfiniteclausesoftemporal,causal(3),conditional,andconcessivemeanings);inthepositionofobjectcomplementingverbs,adjectives,andnouns,condensingnominal‘that’-clauses(4),‘if’-clauses(5),andrelativefiniteclauses(6).Becausetheothersyntacticfunctionsofnominaliza-tionconsideredbyRadovanovic(1978)andCasule(19),likenominalizationasanintegralpartofaperiphrasticpredicatestructure,arenotinlinewiththedefinitioninthisstudyofnominalizedstruc-turesasanalternativeoffiniteclausalstructures,thisstudydidnotconsiderthem.

(1)

‘[O]urworthyseniorhastimeandagainsaid,inthecourseofachat_ADV_TEM_ZN,thatshecan’tseetheearthlyuseofamanwellupinyears,asyourlordandmasteris,havinghereoneconcubine,andthereanother?’

(Joly,13,p.344)

(2)

‘[Y]ourcompleterecovery_SUB_THAT_DN,uncle,isreallyablessingtoourwholefamily.’(Joly,13,p.22)(3)

JiaZhen’sandMadamYou’skindreception_SUB_CAU_DNhadtransformedherindignationintopleasure.(TheYangs,2003,p.277)

4of14

LiteraryandLinguisticComputing,2013

(4)

‘[A]ssoonasIheardofher(P’ingErh’s)arrival_OBJ_VERB_DN,Icasuallyrememberedthathermistressem-ployed,duringhertime,suchdomesticsaswereuptoallkindsoflarks.’

(Joly,13,p.523)(5)

‘IftheLadyDowagerorLadyWangwerehereIwouldn’tmindyourdrinking_OBJ_VERB_IF_GNawholejarful.’

(TheYangs,2003,p.233)(6)

Aftersomedaysontheroadtheywereapproachingthecapitalwhenwordcameofthepromotion_OBJ_NOUN_DNofhisuncleWangZitengtothepostofCommander-in-ChiefofNineProvinceswithorderstoinspecttheborders.(TheYangs,2003,p.113)

AlloccurrencesoftheNOMsweremanuallytaggedaftercarefulconsultationofthetwoauthori-tativeEnglishgrammarbooks:AComprehensiveGrammaroftheEnglishLanguage(Quirketal.,1985)andLongmanGrammarofSpokenandWrittenEnglish(Biberetal.,1999).Thisconsult-ationisnecessaryespeciallyfordeterminingwhichverbs,adjectives,andnounscanbecomplementedbyfiniteclausalstructures.ANOMtagwasjoinedwithalexicalunitbytheunderscore[see(1)–(6)above].In(1),ADV_TEM_ZNdenotesthat‘chat’isaZNand‘inthecourseofachat’isanadverbialstructureandcondensesanadverbialfiniteclauseoftemporalmeaning.In(2),SUJ_THAT_DNdenotesthat‘recovery’isaDNand‘yourcompleterecovery’isinthepositionofsubjectandcondensesanom-inal‘that’-clause.In(5),OBJ_VERB_IF_GNde-notesthat‘drinking’isaGNand‘yourdrinking’isinthepositionofobjectcomplementingtheverb‘mind’andcondensesan‘if’-clause.Afterthetaggingwasfinished,thecorpussoftwareAntConcwasusedforstatisticalpurposes.

Inthisstudy,bothqualitativeandquantitativeanalyseswereconducted.ThequalitativeanalysisdealtwithdescribingvariouseffectsoftheuseofEnglishnominalizationintranslation.Becausenominalizedstructuresandtheircorrespondingfiniteclausalstructuresconstitutethetranslator’schoice,itisagoodwaytodemonstratetheeffectsoftheirusebasedondifferentversionsofasamesourcetext.Inviewofthis,wedecidedtochoosethreeEnglishversionsoftheChineseclassicnovelHongLouMeng(HLM)(Table1).Thequantitativeanalysisdealtwithhownominalizationwasusedin

Downloaded from http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/ at Shanghai International Studies University on November 14, 2013Acorpus-basedstudyofnominalization

thethreeEnglishversionsofHLMandfiveotherbasedonthethreeversionsofHLM.Thisdemon-EnglishtranslationsofChinesenovels(seeTable1strationwascoupledwithagrammaticalanalysisofforabriefintroductiontothem).1Finally,acom-thenominalizedstructure(s)ineachexampleandparativequantitativeanalysisofnominalizationwaswhatitcorresponds/theycorrespondtointhemadebetweentheeightEnglishtranslationsandfivesourcetextandintheothertranslation(s).

Englishnovels(seeTable1forabriefintroductiontothem).2AbriefintroductionofthethreeEnglish(7)

versionsofHLMisasfollows.

HLMwaswritteninthemiddleoftheeighteenthcenturyduringtheQingDynasty(1616–1911).Itisguo`yı`shı¯

za`ichı¯

cha´aftersometimethen

drinktea

generallyconsideredtobeasemi-autobiographical(CaoandGao,2003,p.80)

story,mirroringtheriseandfalloftheauthorCaoXueqin’s(about1715–63)ownfamilyand,byex-Hawkes:Dai-yu’sparentshadbroughttheirtension,oftheQingDynasty.ItisuniversallydaughteruptobelievethatgoodhealthwasacknowledgedtobeapinnacleofChinesenovelsfoundedoncarefulhabits,andinpursuanceandhighlyreputedasanencyclopediaofChineseofthisprinciple,hadalwaysinsistedthatafterculture.ThethreeEnglishversionschosenareamealoneshouldallowacertainintervaltoHongLouMeng(12–93)byBencraftJoly(tobeelapsebeforetakingteainordertoavoidabbreviatedasJolyhereafter),TheStoryoftheStoneindigestion.(1973–86)byDavidHawkesandJohnMinford(to(Hawkes,1973,p.99)beabbreviatedasHawkeshereafter),andADreamofJoly:[T]heLinfamilyhadallalongimpressedRedMansions(2003)byYangXianyiandGladysuponthemindoftheirdaughterthatinorderYang(tobeabbreviatedastheYangshereafter).toshowdueregardtohappiness,andtopre-Ofthem,Joly’sversionisacompletetranslationofservegoodhealth,itwasessential,aftereverythefirstfifty-sixchapters,whiletheothertwover-meal,towaitawhile,beforedrinkinganytea,sionsarebothcomplete120-chapterproductions.sothatitshouldnotdoanyharmtotheHawkestranslatedthefirsteightychapters,whileintestines.

Minfordtranslatedtheremainingfortychapters(Joly,12,p.48–49)lateron.TheYangs’versionwasfirstpreparedbyMr.Yangandthenpolishedbyhiswife.

TheYangs:NowLinRuhaihadtaughthisdaughterthevirtueofmoderationandtheharmcausedtothedigestivesystembydrink-5Ademonstrationoftheeffectsofingteadirectlyafterameal.

nominalizationintranslation

(TheYangs,2003,p.81)Inexample(7),theoriginalsentenceconcernsInthissection,eightexampleswerechosenforDaiyu’srecollectionofhisfather’steachingofademonstratingvariouseffectsoftheuseofNOMs

generalprincipleofpreservinggoodhealth.Both

Table1TheeightEnglishtranslationsofChinesenovelsandthefiveEnglishnovels

TheeightEnglishThethreeEnglishversionsofHLMTheJourneyJourneytoCamelThreeFortresstranslationsoftotheWesttheWestXiangziKingdomsBesiegedChinesenovelsJoly’sversionTheYangs’

Hawkes’(1973–77)

(1982–86)

(1988)

(1994)

(2003)

(12–93)version

version(2003)(1973–80)

ThefiveEnglishJaneEyre(1847)

TessoftheMomentinNineteenEighty-Four(1949)TheBridgesnovels

D’UrbervillesPeking(1939)

ofMadison(11)

County(1992)

LiteraryandLinguisticComputing,20135of14

Downloaded from http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/ at Shanghai International Studies University on November 14, 2013Y.Hou

HawkesandJolychoseanominalizedstructure(introducedbythepreposition‘before’)asacondenseroftemporalclause,whichmakesimpli-citthesubjectandpresenttense,whiletheYangschoseagerundialstructure(introducedbythepassivemarker‘by’).Bothnominalizedstruc-turesgiveanobjectiveeffect,whichcontributestothegeneralapplicabilityofthehealth-preservingprinciple.

(8)

zhe`ngda¯ngjie¯da`ozhı¯

jı`justwhenlamentgrieveattributivemarkertime

(CaoandGao,2003,p.4)

Hawkes:Oneday,inthemidstofitslament-ings,itsawamonkandaTaoistapproachingfromagreatdistance.

(Hawkes,1973,p.47)Joly:Oneday,whileitlamenteditslot,itsud-denlycaughtsight,atagreatdistance,ofaBuddhistbonzeandofaTaoistpriestcomingtowardsthatdirection.

(Joly,12,p.3)TheYangs:OnedayastheStonewasbrood-ingoveritsfate,itsawapproachingfromthedistanceaBuddhistmonkandTaoistpriest.

(TheYangs,2003,p.5)Inexample(8),thecontextofthepassageimme-diatelybeforetheextractisthatobservingthatalltheotherblockshavebeenusedforcelestialrepairsandthatitwastheonlyonerejectedasunworthy,thestonewasfilledwithshameandresentmentandpasseditsdaysinsorrowandlamentation.

Intranslating,Hawkeschoseanominalizedstructure(introducedbytheprepositionalphrase‘inthemidstof’)asacondenseroftemporalclause.Thisstructuremakesimplicitthepastpro-gressiveaspectandtheobject.Incontrast,JolyandtheYangseachchoseafiniteclausalstructurewhereJolyrenderedinto‘lamented’andadded‘itslot’asitsobject,whiletheYangsrendered

into‘broodingover’andadded‘itsfate’asitsobject.Intermsofstylisticeffect,Hawkes’choiceof‘lamenting’inthepluralformintensifiesthestone’slament,whileboththeYangsandJoly’s

6of14

LiteraryandLinguisticComputing,2013

choicesmaketheobjectofthestone’slamentmoreexplicit.

(9)

’

’

ta¯zı

`jıˇyo`ulaˇolehe

himself

particleoldparticle(CaoandGao,2003,p.212)

TheYangs:MadameYousighed,‘sincegrow-ingoldhehasnoregardforappearances.Hedoesnothingbutdrinkandwhenhe’sdrunkheabuseseveryone’.

(TheYangs,2003,p.213)Hawkes:‘[S]incehe’sgrownoldhehaslethimselfgocompletely.Hedrinksallthetime,andwhenhe’sdrunkhestartsabusingeverybody—literallyeverybody.’

(Hawkes,1973,p.181)Joly:‘Heisalsoadvancedinyears,anddoesn’tcareaboutanydecentmanners;hissolede-lightiswine;andwhenhegetsdrunk,thereisn’tasinglepersonwhomhewon’tabuse.’

(Joly,12,p.118)Inexample(9),thecontextofthepassagesur-roundingtheextractisthatJiaoDa,anoldman-servantintheNingguomansion,wasloudlycursinghismastersincehewasassignedtosendQinZhonghomeatnight.Intranslating,theYangschoseanominalizedstructure(introducedbythepreposition‘since’)asacondenserofcausalclause.Thisstructuregivesaconciseeffectbecauseitmakesimplicitthesubjectandpresentperfectaspect.Incontrast,bothHawkesandJolychoseafiniteclausalstructure.Withregardto(‘growold’),Jolychose‘advancedinyears’,whichisoftenusedasaformalandpoliteexpressionofsayingsomeoneisold.Here,Joly’sex-pressionmaynotreflectthetoneintheoriginalwhereMadameYouwascomplainingaboutJiaoDa’stakingadvantageofhisoldageandlackofdecentmannersratherthanshowingrespecttohim.

(10)

jia

ˇmuˇqıˇshe¯njı

`nne`ijia¯nge¯ngyı¯

ladyJia

riseenter

innerroomchangeclothes(CaoandGao,2003,p.1534)

Downloaded from http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/ at Shanghai International Studies University on November 14, 2013Acorpus-basedstudyofnominalization

Joly:[D]owagerladyChiaroseandpenetratedInexample(10),

(‘enter’)and(‘changeintotheinnerchamberwiththepurposeofclothes’)constituteaserialverbalconstruction.Jolyeffectingachangeinhercostume,sothesev-renderedintoanominalizedstructure(intro-eralinmatespresentcouldatlastdisperseandducedbyaformalprepositionalphrase‘withthepur-gotheirownway.

poseof’)asacondenserofpurposiveclause,while(Joly,13,p.476)boththeYangsandHawkeschoseaconciseinfinitivalTheYangs:[T]heLadyDowagerroseandstructure.Thenominalizedstructuremakesimplicitwentintotheinnerroomtochangeherthesubjectandthemodalverb‘could’.Intranslating

clothes,whereuponthepartybrokeup.(‘change’),Jolychoseaperiphrasticpredicate(TheYangs,2003,p.1535)structure‘effect(ing)achange’,whichisformalandoftenfoundin‘officialese’(Olsson,1961,p.221).Hawkes:[W]henallhadeatenanddrunk,Joly’suseoftheprepositionalphraseandtheperi-GrandmotherJiaroseandwentintoanphrasticpredicatestructuremakesladyJia’sclothes-innerroomtochangeoutofhercourtdress,changingratherformal.Withregardto(‘clothes’),whichshehadallthistimebeenwearing.ThisHawkesmadeasemanticexplicitation,asshownbywasasignalfortheotherspresenttodisperse.‘hercourtdress,whichshehadallthistimebeen(Hawkes,1977,p.574–5)

wearing’.Thistreatmenthelpsthereaderunderstandthebackgroundinformation.

(11)(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)(8)(9)yı¯nza`ijia¯owa`isho`ulexie¯fe¯ngshua¯ngyo

`uyuˇzhı`ne´ngrto¯uqı¯qua

ˇnqiaˇnsinceincountrysidecatchaspectmarkersomewindfrostalsowithZhinengr

secretly

haveanaffair

(CaoandGao,2003,p.398)

Hawkes:(1)QinZhong’salwayssicklycon-extremelypoorstateofhealththat(8)hestitution(4)hadbeenmuchneglectedduringsimplykeptindoorsandnursedhimself,andtheirtwo-dayexcursionintothecountry,and(9)wasnotinafitconditiontogotoschool.

(2)theunwontedexposuretowindandcold(Joly,12,p.223)and(3)immoderateindulgenceinsecretfrolicwithSapientia(5)hadresultedonhisreturnTheYangs:(1)QinZhonghadaweakcon-inacoughandchill(6)accompaniedbytotalstitution,and(2)acoldhehadcaughtinthelossofappetite.(7)Altogetherhepresentedsocountryfollowing(3)hissecretaffairwithsorryaspectacle(8)thatstudywasquiteoutZhinenghad(4)upsethim;thus(5)onhisofthequestionand(9)theywereobligedtoreturntotown(6)hedevelopedacoughandsendhimbackhometobed.

(7)losthisappetitecompletely.(8)Tooweak(Hawkes,1973,p.302)

togoout,(9)hehadtorestathome.

(TheYangs,2003,p.399)Joly:(1)Ch’inChung,whowasnaturallyofanextremelydelicatephysique,(2)caughtInexample(11),boththeoriginalverbalclausalsomewhatofachillinthecountryand(3)structures(2)and(3)denotecausalmeaning,as

clandestinelyindulged,besides,inanintimacyshownbythecausalconjunction

(‘since’).InwithChihNeng,(4)whichunavoidablymadetranslating,Hawkeschosetoshiftthemtotwohimfailtotakegoodcareofhimself,hewas,nominalizedstructures.Theyappearintheposition(5)shortlyafterhisreturn,troubledwithaofsubjectandfunctionasacondenseroftwofinitecoughandafeverishcold,(6)withnauseaclausalstructuresofcausalmeanings.Thesetwoandfordrinkandfood,and(7)fellintosuchan

othertranslationshiftscontributetomaintaina

LiteraryandLinguisticComputing,2013

7of14

Downloaded from http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/ at Shanghai International Studies University on November 14, 2013Y.Hou

smoothflowofthediscourseinhistranslationbe-causetheylinktheoriginalshortparatacticunitsinahypotacticway.AccordingtoLongacre(1983,p.327),‘[i]tisessentialthatcertainpredicationsbenominalizedoratleastsubordinatedinsomefash-ionandshovedtotheside.Theymustnotbeper-mittedtoimpedetheflowofthediscourse’.TheYangschosetoshifttheoriginalstructures(2)and(3)totwonounphrases.Thesetwoandothertrans-lationshiftsequallycontributetomaintainasmoothflowofthediscourseintheirtranslation.However,Jolychosetorenderthemintwoclausalstructures.Thesetwoandotherformalcor-respondencesseemtointerrupttheflowofthedis-courseinhistranslationinthattheendproductconsistsofaseriesofsentencesorclausesrigidlystrungtogether.

(12)

‘

’

za`iyuduo¯shuo¯zhe

ˇbı`fa´still

havemoresaypersonmustpenalize

(CaoandGao,2003,p.1026)

TheYangs:‘I’mthearbiter’,insistedLiWan.‘You’venosayinthematter.Anymoreargu-mentwillbepenalized.’

(TheYang,2003,p.1027)Hawkes:‘Youagreedtoabidebymydeci-sions’,saidLiWan.‘Idon’tthinktherestofyouhaveanysayinthematter.Ifanyonequestionsadecisionofmineinfuture,hewillhavetopayapenalty.’(Hawkes,1977,p.225)Joly:‘Youshould’,arguedLiWan,‘fallinwithmyjudgment;thisisnobusinessofanyofyou,sowhoeversaysanythingmorewillhavetopayapenalty.’(Joly,13,p.201)Inexample(12),theoriginalconcernsafamilypoetry-writingcompetitionamongtheyoungpeoplewithLiWanelectedasjudge.Sheischarac-terizedasanindependentandstrictjudge.Theori-ginalunderlinedstructureimpliesconditionalmeaning.Intranslating,theYangschoseanomina-lizedstructureasacondenserofconditionalclause,

8of14

LiteraryandLinguisticComputing,2013

whiletheothertwotranslatorseachchoseafiniteclausalstructure.Intermsofstylisticeffect,theYangs’nominalizedexpressionisconciseandforce-ful.ItcontributestoportrayingLiWanasanauthori-tativearbitrator,asitismorelikethelanguageofanorderconveyingastrongerandmoredirecttone.

(13)

gura´nshı`ga`osuta¯zhe

`hua`reallytell

herthisnews

(CaoandGao,2003,p.994)

TheYangs:XirenwoketwooftheothergirlsandleftHappyRedCourtwithBaochai,goingonalonetoXifeng’squarters.ThereshewasindeedinformedofherpromotionandtoldtogoandkowtowtoLadyWang,butnottotroubletheLadyDowager.Xirenwasquiteoverwhelmed.

(TheYangs,2003,p.995)Hawkes:Aromahadtoarousetwoofthesleepingmaidstotakeherplaceintheinnerroom;thensheandBao-chaileftGreenDelightstogether.Theypartedcompanyout-side,andAromawentofftoXi-feng’splaceonherown.Whenshegotthereshewas,asBao-chaihadpredicted,formallyacquaintedwiththenewarrangementsconcerningherpayandstatusthathadjustbeenmadeforherbyLadyWang.ShefoundthisinterviewwithXi-fengacutelyembarrassing.

(Hawkes,1977,p.204)Joly:HsiJencouldnotthereforedootherwisethanarousetwoservant-maidsandgo.Sheproceeded,withPao-ch’ai,outoftheIHungcourt,andthenrepairedallalonetoladyFeng’sonthisside.Itwasindeedtocommu-nicatetoherwhathadbeendecidedabouther,andtoexplaintoher,aswell,thatthoughshecouldgoandprostrateherselfbeforeMadameWang,shecoulddispensewithseeingdowagerladyChia.ThisnewsmadeHisJenfeelveryawkward.

(Joly,13,p.184–5)

Downloaded from http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/ at Shanghai International Studies University on November 14, 2013Acorpus-basedstudyofnominalization

Inexample(13),thecontextaroundtheextractInexample(14),theoriginalconcernsSheyue’sisthatBaoyu’smotherLadyWanginstructeddialoguewithQingwenwhoisstillsickwithacold.XifengtoincreasethemonthlyallowanceofInfact,Sheyuecouldhaveexpressedtheunderlined

Baoyu’sseniormaidXirenandtopayheratthepartinanotherwayof

,whichsameratethetwoconcubinesofBaoyu’sfatheradds(‘your’)asapossessivepronounof

wouldenjoyinfuture.Xiren’senjoyingahigher(‘sickness’).However,shefeelsembarrassedtodosorateinpaymentimpliesLadyWang’spromotionbecausesheisclearlyawarethatQingwendislikesofherinstatusasBaoyu’sconcubineorchamber

peopletalkingabouthersickness.

wife.

(‘thisnews’)referstoLadyWang’sTheYangschoseanominalizedstructure‘infec-arrangements.

tion’ascomplementof‘fear’,whilebothHawkesTheYangschoseanominalizedstructureasandJolychoseafiniteclausalstruture.Thenomi-complementoftheverb‘inform(ed)’.Thisstructurenalizedstructureisconcisebecauseitmakesimplicitgivesaterseeffectsinceitmakesimplicitbothpastthesubject,theobject,presenttense,andvoice.Inperfectaspectandvoice.Semantically,theYangs’rendering,Hawkeschose‘incase’,whichismorechoiceof‘herpromotion’isanexactsummaryofcolloquial,whileboththeYangsandJolychosewhatrepresentswhileHawkes’underlined

‘fear’,whichsoundsmoreserious.Inrenderingchoicedetailseverythingabout

.Bothchoices,Hawkeschosealessseriousword‘sickness’,aremoreexplicitthanJoly’schoice.

whileJolychoseamedicallyflavoredexpression(14)

‘

‘thevirusofthedisease’.Insum,Hawkes’choicesaremoreappropriateinreproducingSheyue’stone.

’

pa

`guo`lebı

`ngqı`6Aquantitativeanalysisofnomsfearcatchparticle

sickness

(CaoandGao,2003,p.1488)

inthethreeEnglishversionsofTheYangs:‘Let’sgethimupanddressedfirst,HLM

andmoveawaythisclothes-warmerbeforewecalltheothers’,sheproposed.‘ThenursessaidTable2showsstatisticalresultsoftheNOMsusedinhewasn’ttosleepinthisroomforfearofthefirstfifty-sixchaptersofthethreeEnglishversionsinfection.’

ofHLM.AlthoughtheirusesoftheNOMsdifferin(TheYangs,2003,p.14)totalnumber(1,311versus809versus746)andaver-agecoverage(1/337versus1/347versus1/516),theyHawkes:‘We’dbetterbothwakehimandwaitaresimilarinatleastthefollowingthreeaspects.tillhe’sdressedandtheclothes-warmerhasFirstly,theNOMswereallpredominantlyusedasbeencarriedbacktoitsusualplacebeforeadverbialasopposedtointhepositionsofobjectandwelettheothersin’,shesaid.‘Theoldsubject.Thispredominancerangesfrom77%ofthewomenhavealreadysaidthathe’snottototalnumberoftheNOMsinHawkes’versionuptosleepinthesameroomasyouincasehe92%ofthetotalnumberoftheNOMsinJoly’sver-catchesyoursickness.’

sion.Secondly,theNOMsappearedmorefrequently(Hawkes,1977,p.543)intheformofGNthanintheformsofDNandZN.ThetotalnumberofGNsaccountforabout50%ofJoly:‘Let’scallhimtogetupanddressinhisthetotalnumberoftheNOMsineachversion.fineclothes’,shesaid.‘WecansummonthemThirdly,theNOMswereallpredominantlyusedinin,afterthisfire-boxhasbeenremoved.Thethenarrativeasopposedtoindialogues(74%versusoldnursestoldusnottoallowhimtostayin26%inJoly’sversion,%versus36%intheYangs’thisroomforfearthevirusofthediseaseversion,and72%versus28%inHawkes’version).shouldpassontohim.’FormoredetailsoftheNOMsusedinthethreever-(Joly,13,p.452–3)

sionsofHLM,refertoHou(2011).

LiteraryandLinguisticComputing,2013

9of14

Downloaded from http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/ at Shanghai International Studies University on November 14, 2013Y.Hou

Table2QuantitativeresultsoftheNOMsusedinthefirstfifty-sixchaptersofthethreeEnglishversionsofHLM

TheNOMs

Joly’sversion(12–93)TheYangs’version(2003)Hawkes’version(1973–80)Asadverbial

1,202(92%)636(79%)575(77%)Inthepositionofsubject32(2%)63(8%)52(7%)Inthepositionofobject77(6%)110(13%)119(16%)Totalnumber1,311

809

746

GNs/DNs/ZNs

7/408/256(49/31/20%)443/216/150(55/27/18%)466/185/95(62/25/13%)Numberofwordscovered441,939280,745384,848AverageNOMcoverage1/337

1/347

1/516

Dialogue/narrative

336/975(26/74%)

294/515(36/%)

212/534(28/72%)

7AquantitativeanalysisofNOMspatternsrevealedfromtheuseoftheNOMsintheinotherEnglishtranslationsofthreeEnglishversionsofHLM.

Chineseproseworks

Table3showsstatisticalresultsoftheNOMsusedin8AquantitativeanalysisofNOMstheotherfiveEnglishtranslationsofChineseliteraryinsomeEnglishliteraryproseproseworks.Asfarastheirdifferencesarecon-cerned,onemajordifferenceliesintheiraverageworks

NOMcoverages,whichrangefromthelowestTable4listsstatisticalresultsoftheuseofthe1/944inTheJourneytotheWesttothehighestNOMsinthefiveEnglishnovels,fromwhichat1/301inCamelXiangzi.Thisdifferenceisinevitableleastthreepatternswerefound.Firstly,theNOMsgiventhatthesetranslationsarebasedonthewereallsignificantlymoreusedasadverbial,fol-Chineseworksdifferentfromeachotherinsuchlowedbytheiruseinthepositionsofobjectandaspectsasauthor,plot,andyearofpublication.subject.ThepercentageofNOMsasadverbialEvenforthetwoEnglishtranslationsofthesamerangesfrom67%inTessoftheD’urbervillestoChinesenovelXiYouJi,theiraverageNOMcover-87%inTheBridgesofMadisonCounty.Theagesarealsodifferent,whichmaybeattributedtonumberoftheNOMsasadverbialineachworkthedifferenttranslationpurposesoftheirrespectiveexceedsthecombinednumberoftheNOMsintranslatorsorthedifferentsocialandculturalmi-thepositionsofsubjectandobject.Secondly,GNslieusinwhichtheywereimmersed.

wereallmoreusedthanDNsandZNs.Thepercent-Asfarastheirsimilaritiesareconcerned,atleastageofGNsrangesfrom47%inMomentinPekingtothreepatternswerefound.Firstly,theNOMswere78%inTheBridgesofMadisonCounty.ThenumberallsignificantlymoreusedasadverbialthanintheofGNsexceedsthecombinednumberofDNsandpositionsofobjectandsubject.TheNOMsasad-ZNsinalmostallthefiveworks(exceptinMomentverbialaccountfor70–94%ofthetotaloccurrencesinPeking).Thirdly,theNOMswereallsignificantlyoftheNOMsineachversion.Secondly,GNsweremoreusedinthenarrativethanindialogues.TheallsignificantlymoreusedthanDNsandZNs.ThepercentageofNOMsinthenarrativerangesfromoccurrencesoftheGNsaccountfor59–75%ofthe79%inJaneEryeto95%inNineteenEighty-Four.totaloccurrencesoftheNOMs.Thirdly,theNOMsAlthoughTessoftheD’urbervillesenjoysthehigh-wereallsignificantlymoreusedinthenarrativethanestaverageNOMcoverageamongthefiveEnglishindialogues.TheoccurrencesoftheNOMsinthenovels,itisstillmuchlowerthanthatinJoly’sver-narrativeaccountfor69–100%ofthetotaloccur-sion(1/633versus1/337).Therefore,moreworksrencesoftheNOMsineachversion.Obviously,publishedinthesameperiodasJoly’sversionofthesethreepatternsareconsistentwiththethree

HLM(12–93)needtobeexaminedtoascertain

10of14

LiteraryandLinguisticComputing,2013

Downloaded from http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/ at Shanghai International Studies University on November 14, 2013Acorpus-basedstudyofnominalization

Table3QuantitativeresultsoftheNOMsusedinthefiveEnglishtranslationsofthefourChineseliteraryproseworks

TheNOMs

TheJourneytotheJourneytotheCamelXiangziThree

Fortress

West(1973–77)West(1982–86)(1988)

Kingdoms(1994)Besieged(2003)Asadverbial

62(85%)83(94%)59(79%)58(70%)129(81%)Inthepositionofsubject6(8%)1(1%)6(8%)7(8%)16(10%)Inthepositionofobject5(7%)4(5%)10(13%)18(22%)14(9%)Totalnumber73

88

75

83

159

GNs/DNs/ZNs

55/10/8(75/14/11%)65/16/7(74/18/8%)50/10/15(67/13/20%)49/25/9(59/30/11%)106/25/28(66/16/18%)Numberofwordscovered68,943

65,191

22,544

44,949

52,155

Chaptercoverage

10/100chapters10/100chapters6/24chapters10/120chapters3/9chaptersAverageNOMcoverage1/944

1/741

1/301

1/542

1/328

Dialogue/narrative

21/52(29/71%)

32/56(36/%)

0/75(0/100%)

26/57(31/69%)

24/135(15/85%)

Table4QuantitativeresultsoftheNOMsusedinthefiveEnglishliteraryproseworks

TheNOM

JaneErye(1847)Tessofthe

MomentinNineteenEighty-FourTheBridgesof

D’urbervilles(11)Peking(1939)(1949)

MadisonCounty(1992)Asadverbial

10(72%)28(67%)52(81%)17(77%)20(87%)Inthepositionofsubject2(14%)1(2%)5(8%)3(14%)3(13%)Inthepositionofobject2(14%)13(31%)7(11%)2(9%)0(0%)Totalnumber14

42

22

23

GNs/DNs/ZNs

7/5/2(50/36/14%)22/17/3(52/40/8%)30/24/10(47/38/15%)14/2/6(/9/27%)18/5/0(78/22/0%)Numberofwordscovered18,970

26,594

60,399

34,419

36,620

Chapter/partcoverage6/38chapters1/7chapters9outof45chapters1outof3partsthewholebookAverage(NOM)coverage1/1,355

1/633

1/944

1/1,565

1/1,592

Dialogue/narrative

3/11(21/79%)

8/34(19/81%)

4/60(7/93%)

1/21(5/95%)

2/21(9/91%)

whetherthereisa(causal)correlationbetweenJoly’sworks.TheuseofnominalizationinbothtextuseofnominalizationinHLMtranslationandthetypessharesatleastthefollowingthreepatterns:itBritishVictorianAge.Moreover,thereseemstobewaspredominantlyusedasadverbial(ratherthaninnothingparticularaboutthestatisticalresultofthethepositionsofobjectandsubject),intheformofNOMsinMomentinPeking,asitsaverageNOMGN(ratherthanDNandZN),andinthenarrativecoverageiswithintherangeofaverageNOMcover-(ratherthanindialogues).

agesinthefivenovels.Inviewofthis,moreEnglishAmajordifferencebetweenthetwotexttypesliesworkswrittenbyChineseauthorsneedtobeexam-intheiraverageNOMcoverages(1/407versusinedtorevealtheirdifferencesfromthosewrittenby1/1,072),whichmeansthattheNOMsweresignifi-Englishwriters.

cantlymoreusedinthefirsttexttypethaninthesecondone.Intermsofsyntacticfunctions,theNOMsasadverbialweremuchmoreusedin9AcomparisonoftheNOMsinthetheformertexttype(84versus77%),whiletheEnglishtranslationsandoriginalNOMsinthepositionsofobjectandsubjectwerealittlemoreusedinthelatterone(15versus11%,8literaryproseworks

versus5%).ThepercentagedifferenceoftheNOMsasadverbialinthetwotexttypesismoreremarkableTable5showsstatisticalresultsoftheNOMsusedinthanthepercentagedifferencesoftheNOMsinthetheeightEnglishtranslationsofChineseliterarypositionsofsubjectandobject.IntermsofNOMproseworksandthefiveEnglishliteraryprose

category,bothGNsandZNsappearedalittlemore

LiteraryandLinguisticComputing,201311of14

Downloaded from http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/ at Shanghai International Studies University on November 14, 2013Y.Hou

Table5QuantitativeresultsoftheNOMsusedintheEnglishtranslationsoftheChineseliteraryproseworksandtheEnglishliteraryproseworks

TheNOMs

Asadverbial

Inthepositionofsubject183(5%)14(8%)

Inthepositionofobject357(11%)24(15%)

Totalnumber(percentage)3,344(100%)165(100%)

GNs/DNs/ZNs(percentage)

1,881/5/568(56/27/17%)91/53/21(55/32/13%)

Averagecoverage1/4071/1,072

Dialogue/narrative

Intheeight

EnglishtranslationsInthefive

2,804(84%)127(77%)

945/2,399(28/72%)18/147(11/%)

Englishnovels

frequentlyintheformertexttype(56versus55%,17versus13%),whileDNsappearedmuchmorefrequentlyinthelatterone(32versus27%).ThepercentagedifferenceoftheGNsinthetwotexttypesislessremarkablethanthepercentagediffer-encesoftheDNsandZNs.Finally,theNOMsindialoguesappearedmuchmorefrequentlyinthefirsttexttype(28versus11%),whiletheNOMsinthenarrativeappearedmuchmorefrequentlyinthesecondtexttype(versus72%).Theirdifferencesinthisregardareremarkable.

10Conclusion

Thisarticleisdesignedtoanalyzetheuseofnom-inalizationinEnglishtranslationsofChineseliteraryproseworksbasedontheeightEnglishtranslationsofChinesenovels.Itwasfoundthatnominalizationispredominantlyusedasadverbial(asopposedtointhepositionsofobjectandsubject),intheformofgerundivenominalization(asopposedtoderivedandzero-derivednominalizations),andinthenar-rative(asopposedtoindialogues).ItwasalsofoundthatnominalizationissignificantlymoreusedintheEnglishtranslationsofChineseliteraryproseworksthaninthefiveEnglishliteraryproseworksatlarge.

Thisempiricalstudy,tosomeextent,hasen-richedanddeepenedourunderstandingofEnglishnominalization.ItisexpectedthatitwillshedsomeusefullightonsimilarstudiesofnominalizationinEnglishtranslationsofliteraryprose(andothertexttypes)fromotherlanguagesthanChinese,sothatamorecomprehensiveknowledgeofEnglishnomin-alizationcanbeachieved.

12of14

LiteraryandLinguisticComputing,2013

Thisstudywasconductedwithinthetheoreticalframeworkofnominalizationandcomplexconden-sationofthesentenceoftheeminentPragueSchool(bothclassicalandmodern),whichsubsumessomelexical-grammaticalconceptsinsystemic-functionalgrammar.Evenso,thisisonlyoneofseveraltheor-eticalapproaches,whichcanofferequallyusefulin-sightstothestudyofEnglishnominalizationinliteratureandothertexttypes.

Becausethisstudywasbasedonalimitedamountofdata,thestatisticalresultsarenotfullyrepresentativeoftheuseofnominalizationinEnglishtranslationsofChineseliteraryprose.Inthefuture,largeramountsofdatawillbeexaminedsoastomakethequantitativeresultsmorereliable.Furtherresearchonthefactorstriggeringitsuseintranslationwillalsobeconductedthroughcomput-ingloggingandthink-aloud-protocols.

Funding

ThisarticlewassupportedbytheChineseMinistryofEducation[12YJC740030].

References

Biber,D.,Johansson,S.,Leech,G.,Conrad,S.,andFinegan,E.(1999).LongmanGrammarofSpokenandWrittenEnglish.Harlow:Longman.

Casule,I.(19).SintaksanaMakedonskataGlagolskaImenka:GlagolskataImenkavoSovremeniotMakedonskiLiteraturenJazik(SyntaxoftheMacedonianVerbalNoun).Skopje:Studentskizbor.

Chomsky,N.(1957).SyntacticStructures.TheHague:Mouton.

Downloaded from http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/ at Shanghai International Studies University on November 14, 2013Acorpus-basedstudyofnominalization

Chomsky,N.(1971).RemarksonNominalization.InRadovanovic,M.(1978).Imenicaufunkcijikondenza-Jacobs,R.(ed.),ReadingsinEnglishTransformationaltora.NoviSad:Maticasrpska[¼Odeljenjezaknjizˇev-Grammar.Waltham,MA:Ginn,pp.184–221.nostijezik;PosebanotisakizZbornikazafilologijuiDuris,R.(2006).TheEnglishGerundanditsSlovaklingvistiku20/1–2,1977].1978.1–163.

Equivalents.http://www.google.com.au/search?source¼Radovanovic,M.(2001).Onnominalandverbalstyle:ig&hl¼en&rlz¼1G1GGLQ_ENAU342&q¼TheþEngculturesorlanguageincontact?InternationalJournallishþGerundþandþItsþSlovakþEquivalents&btnG¼oftheSociologyofLanguage,151:41–48.

GoogleþSearch(accessed30May2012).

Wang,J.J.(2003).MingcihuazaiYupianLeixingHalliday,M.A.(1987).SpokenandWrittenModesofzhongdeTixian(Ontheuseofnominalizationindif-Meaning.InHorowitz,R.andSamuels,S.J.(eds),ferenttexttypes).WaiyuJiaoxue(ForeignLanguagesComprehendingOralandWrittenLanguage.SanResearch),2:74–78.

Diego:AcademicPress,pp.55–82.

Yangs,X.Y.andYang,G.(2003).ADreamofRedHalliday,M.A.(1994).AnIntroductiontoFunctionalMansions(Chinese-EnglishEdition).Beijing:ForeignGrammar.London:EdwardArnold.

LanguagesPress.

Hawkes,D.andMinford,J.(1973–86).TheStoryoftheStone,Vol.1–5.Middlesex:PenguinBooks.

Hou,Y.(2011).NominalizationintheTranslationofLiteraryProsefromChineseintoEnglish(BasedontheNotes

ThreeEnglishVersionsofHongLouMeng)Ph.D.thesis,1AbriefintroductiontothefiveotherEnglishtransla-MacquarieUniversity.

tionsoffamousChinesenovelsisasfollows.JourneytoJanigova,S.(2007).Thesubjectof-ingformsinalegaltheWestorXiYouJi,authoredbyWuCheng’enintheEnglishcorpus.LinguisticaPragensia,17(1):1–15.sixteenthcentury,isafictionalizeddescriptionoftheJoly,B.(12–3).HungLouMeng,ortheDreamofthemythologizedlegendsaroundtheTangdynastyRedChamber,aChineseNovel,Vol.1–2.HongKong:BuddhistmonkXuanzang’spilgrimagetoIndiatoKellyandWalsh.

obtainBuddhistsutras.IntermsofitstwonotableEnglishcompleteversions,JourneytotheWest(1982–Konsalova,P.(2007).ExplicitationasaUniversalin84),translatedbyW.J.F.Jenner,ismorereadableSyntacticde/Condensation.AcrossLanguagesandwithoutscholarlyapparatus,whileTheJourneytotheCultures,8(1):17–32.

West(1977–83),translatedbyAnthonyYu,ismoreLangacker,R.(1987).FoundationsofCognitiveGrammar:scholarlywithanextensiveintroductionandnotes.TheoreticalPrerequisites,Vol.1.Stanford,CA:StanfordCamelXiangziorLuotuoXiangzi,authoredbyLaoUniversityPress.

Shein1939,isaboutthelifeofafictionalBeijingrick-Langacker,R.(1991).FoundationsofCognitiveGrammar:shawman.ItsmainsubjectmattersincludethewayinDescriptiveApplication,Vol.2.Stanford,CA:StanfordwhichXiangzimakeshislivingpullingarickshaw,theUniversityPress.

optionshefacesandchoiceshemakes,andespeciallythefundamentalissuesofwhetherheshouldworkin-Lees,R.(1963).TheGrammarofEnglishNominalizations.dependentlyorasaservanttoafamilyandwhetherheTheHague:Mouton.

shouldrentorownarickshaw.OneofitsfiveEnglishLongacre,R.(1983).TheGrammarofDiscourse.NewversionschosenisCamelXiangzi(1988)translatedbyYork,NY:Plenum.

ShiXiaojing.

Mathesius,V.(1975).SelectedWritingsinEnglishandRomanceoftheThreeKingdomsorSanguoYanyi,GeneralLinguistics.TheHague:Mouton.

writtenbyLuoGuanzhonginthefourteenthcentury,Olsson,Y.(1961).OntheSyntaxoftheEnglishVerb,WithisaChinesehistoricalnovelbasedoneventsintheSpecialReferencetoHaveaLookandSimilarComplexturbulentyears,startingintheyear169andendingStructures.Goteborg,Sweden:ElandersBoktryckeriwiththereunificationofthelandintheyear280.Aktiebolag.

Oneofitsgreatestachievementsliesintheextremecomplexityofitsstoriesinterwovenwithnearly1,000Quirk,R.,Greenbaum,S.,Leech,G.,andSvartvik,J.dramaticcharactersin120chapters.OneoftheEnglish(1985).AComprehensiveGrammaroftheEnglishversionschosenisThreeKingdoms(1994)translatedbyLanguage.London:Longman.

MossRoberts.

LiteraryandLinguisticComputing,201313of14

Downloaded from http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/ at Shanghai International Studies University on November 14, 2013Y.Hou

FortressBesiegedorWeiCheng(1944–46),authoredbyQianZhongshu,isahumoroustaleaboutthemiddle-classChinesesocietyinthe1940s.Thetitlede-rivesfromaFrenchproverb:Marriageislikeafortressbesieged:thosewhoareoutsidewanttogetin,andthosewhoareinsidewanttogetout.ItsEnglishversionbyJeanneKellyandNathanMaoisFortressBesieged(2003).

2ThefiveEnglishnovelschosenspanaperiodofabout150yearsfromtheyear1847totheyear1992.Theyallowananalysisoftheresultoftheuseofnominaliza-tioninEnglishliteraryprosefromadiachronicper-spective.Allofthemwerechosenbecausetheyarefamousworks.Moreover,thefollowingthreeworkswerechosenforadditionalreasons.Tessofthe14of14LiteraryandLinguisticComputing,2013

D’urbervilles(11)wasmainlychosenbecauseitwaswrittenbyanEnglishwriteranditspublicationyearisclosetothatofJoly’sversionofHLM.ItsexaminationmaygivesomehinttotheinfluenceoftheVictorianAgeontheuseofnominalizationinJoly’sversionofHLM.ThehistoricalnovelMomentinPeking(1939)waschosenmainlybecauseitwaswrittenbyafamousChinese–AmericanauthorLinYutang.Itschoicemayallowadifferentlookattheuseofnomin-alizationbyChineseauthorsinEnglishnovels.Thelit-erarypoliticalfictionNineteenEighty-Four(1949)waschosenmainlybecauseaccordingtoHodgeandFowler(1979),nominalizationinthefictionwasusedbytheauthorGeorgeOrwellasoneofthetwosyntactictech-niquestoachievemystificationordoublethink.

Downloaded from http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/ at Shanghai International Studies University on November 14, 2013