Translation Universals.pdf - ymerleksi - home

Untypical patterns in translations 107
Corpus of
Non-translated Finnish
(CNF)
Comparison 1 Comparison 2
Multi-source-language
Corpus of
Translated Finnish
(MuCTF)
Comparison 3
Mono-source-language
Corpus of
Translated Finnish
(MoCTF)
Figure 1. The Finnish Comparable Corpus of Fiction (FCCF) and The Three-Phase
Comparative Analysis (TPCA)
make the compilation of the MuCTF possible. To avoid the idiosyncrasy of
a particular text producer, only one text per writer or translator was included
into the data. To describe the data briefly, the FCCF is a written, published,
full-text and synchronic corpus that consists of both non-translational and
translational subcorpora, the latter of which is divided into mono-sourcelanguage
and multi-source-language subcorpora. (For a specific description of
corpus typology, see Laviosa 1997.)
Why then two translational corpora? The aim of using two translational
databases is not only to examine the possible impact of the source language on
translated Finnish but also to study possible characteristics which translations
from one particular source language could exhibit in comparison with translations
in general. This will be tested through the Three-Phase Comparative
Analysis (TPCA), which is illustrated in Figure 1.
Within this triple comparative perspective, phase one is formed of the
comparison of CNF and MuCTF. The MuCTF is meant to represent so-called
general translated Finnish, in other words, Finnish that has been translated
from several source languages and which, presumably, does not reflect characteristics
of any particular source language included in the corpus. In MuCTF,
none of the source languages is dominant so it can be seen as a representative
source of data the aim of which is to stand for translated Finnish in general. The