1,720,968 research outputs found

    20. Énonciation et traduction

    No full text

    Inferential cleft constructions in translation

    No full text

    Marker der Nachzeitigkeit im deutsch-italienischen Vergleich: Eine korpusbasierte Studie zu gleich, sofort, immediatamente und subito

    Full text link
    The goal of this contribution is the analysis of selected expressions of immediate posteriority in German and Italian from a comparative and translation-related perspective. In the present study, which was carried out as part of a joint research project (Nachzeitigkeit in Sprachvergleich und Übersetzung i. e. ‘Expression of Posteriority in Language Comparison and Translation’) at Heidelberg University and the University of Jena, these linguistic expressions are analysed using manual annotations of abstract semantic and pragmatic features on authentic instances using various statistical methods. Occurrences of the adverbs gleich, sofort, immediatamente or subito in the Europarl and OpenSubtitles corpora, in original or translated text material, serve as a source for the analysis. Typical use contexts of the four adverbs will be identified on a language-specific basis, possible influences of the text types/corpus sources on the use of the adverbs will be determined. Moreover, the use contexts of the adverbs will be analysed cross-linguistically as to correspondences and differences between the two languages, and typical translation options for the individual adverbs will be investigated as a result of various influencing parameters. At a general methodological level, the study intends to test rich semantic and pragmatic annotations and their statistical evaluation as approaches to comparative linguistics and translation studies as far as onomasiologically and functionally defined phenomena are concerned

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore