Bringing home the bacon! A contrastive study of the cognates bring/bringe in English and Norwegian

Kalbotyra Pub Date : 2018-01-09 DOI:10.15388/KLBT.2017.11193
S. O. Ebeling
{"title":"Bringing home the bacon! A contrastive study of the cognates bring/bringe in English and Norwegian","authors":"S. O. Ebeling","doi":"10.15388/KLBT.2017.11193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper highlights the value of a bidirectional translation corpus in contrastive studies in an investigation of the cross-linguistic relationship between two cognates in English and Norwegian: bring and bringe. Although monolingual and bilingual dictionaries prove to be excellent sources of information in respect of this relationship, the present study contributes further to our knowledge regarding the cognates’ conditions of use. Drawing on material from the fiction part of the English-Norwegian Parallel Corpus (ENPC), the study reveals that English bring is far more frequent than its Norwegian counterpart. By exploring the close to 500 occurrences of the two words in original and translated texts, it becomes clear that the two verbs have a relatively low Mutual Correspondence. That is, overall, they only correspond to each other in translation in roughly 20% of the cases. This low correspondence rate is surprising, given the fact that we are looking at verbs stemming from the same origin in two closely related languages. The corpus correspondences suggest that there may be at least two main reasons for this. First, Norwegian bringe may be considered more formal than English bring and there is thus a preference for using less formal verbs in Norwegian to express the meaning of bring, notably the multi-word verbs ha med (REFL) ‘have with (REFL)’, ta med (REFL) ‘take with (REFL)’ and komme med ‘come with’. Second, English bring is more versatile than Norwegian bringe, particularly in the sense that it more readily forms part of phrasal verbs and fixed phrases. It is also the case that English bring has come to be used with a wider range of meanings than Norwegian bringe, as attested in the dictionaries consulted. These ‘extra’ meanings include ‘initiate legal action against someone’ and ‘force oneself to do something (unpleasant)’; however, neither of these meanings is particularly salient in the current data. The findings underline the role a parallel corpus such as the ENPC can play in shedding light on contrastive nuances that contribute to a broader understanding of cross-linguistic relationships.","PeriodicalId":30274,"journal":{"name":"Kalbotyra","volume":"70 1","pages":"104-126"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kalbotyra","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15388/KLBT.2017.11193","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper highlights the value of a bidirectional translation corpus in contrastive studies in an investigation of the cross-linguistic relationship between two cognates in English and Norwegian: bring and bringe. Although monolingual and bilingual dictionaries prove to be excellent sources of information in respect of this relationship, the present study contributes further to our knowledge regarding the cognates’ conditions of use. Drawing on material from the fiction part of the English-Norwegian Parallel Corpus (ENPC), the study reveals that English bring is far more frequent than its Norwegian counterpart. By exploring the close to 500 occurrences of the two words in original and translated texts, it becomes clear that the two verbs have a relatively low Mutual Correspondence. That is, overall, they only correspond to each other in translation in roughly 20% of the cases. This low correspondence rate is surprising, given the fact that we are looking at verbs stemming from the same origin in two closely related languages. The corpus correspondences suggest that there may be at least two main reasons for this. First, Norwegian bringe may be considered more formal than English bring and there is thus a preference for using less formal verbs in Norwegian to express the meaning of bring, notably the multi-word verbs ha med (REFL) ‘have with (REFL)’, ta med (REFL) ‘take with (REFL)’ and komme med ‘come with’. Second, English bring is more versatile than Norwegian bringe, particularly in the sense that it more readily forms part of phrasal verbs and fixed phrases. It is also the case that English bring has come to be used with a wider range of meanings than Norwegian bringe, as attested in the dictionaries consulted. These ‘extra’ meanings include ‘initiate legal action against someone’ and ‘force oneself to do something (unpleasant)’; however, neither of these meanings is particularly salient in the current data. The findings underline the role a parallel corpus such as the ENPC can play in shedding light on contrastive nuances that contribute to a broader understanding of cross-linguistic relationships.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
把培根带回家!英语和挪威语同源词bring/bringe的对比研究
本文强调了双向翻译语料库在对比研究中的价值,研究了英语和挪威语中两个同源词:bring和bringe之间的跨语言关系。尽管单语词典和双语词典被证明是这一关系的优秀信息来源,但本研究有助于我们进一步了解同源词的使用条件。根据英语-挪威语平行语料库(ENPC)小说部分的材料,该研究表明,英语带来的频率远高于挪威语。通过探究这两个词在原文和翻译文本中近500次的出现,可以清楚地看出,这两个动词的相互对应性相对较低。也就是说,总的来说,它们只在大约20%的情况下在翻译中相互对应。鉴于我们正在研究两种密切相关的语言中源自同一来源的动词,这种低对应率令人惊讶。语料库的对应关系表明,这可能至少有两个主要原因。首先,挪威语bringe可能被认为比英语bring更正式,因此人们更倾向于在挪威语中使用不太正式的动词来表达bring的含义,尤其是多词动词ha med(REFL)“have with(REFL。其次,英语bring比挪威bringe更通用,特别是在它更容易成为短语动词和固定短语的一部分的意义上。正如查阅的词典所证明的那样,英语bring的使用范围比挪威bringe更广。这些“额外”的含义包括“对某人提起法律诉讼”和“强迫自己做某事(令人不快)”;然而,在目前的数据中,这两种含义都没有特别突出。这些发现强调了像ENPC这样的平行语料库在揭示对比细微差别方面可以发挥的作用,这些细微差别有助于更广泛地理解跨语言关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊最新文献
Metadiscourse in Lithuanian linguistics research articles: A study of interactive and interactional features Poetic and theatrical occasionalisms: Creation of new morphologically complex words by Joseph von Eichendorff, Johann Nepomuk Nestroy, Peter Handke and Arno Schmidt A corpus-based analysis of light verb constructions with MAKE and DO in British English Rytą or ryte? Vakarą or vakare? A corpus analysis of Lithuanian time expressions denoting parts of the day A parallel corpus-based study of the French verb tomber ‘to fall’: Its semantic plurivocity and equivalents in Polish and Lithuanian
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1