See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/309429707

Parallel texts in Translating and Interpreting

Article · January 2004

CITATION READS

1 8,575

1 author:

Georgios Floros
University of Cyprus
36 PUBLICATIONS   132 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Translating Asymmetry – Rewriting Power | Benjamins Translation Library 157 View project

LITHME - Language in the Human-Machine Era View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Georgios Floros on 26 October 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Parallel texts in Translating and Interpreting

GEORGIOS FLOROS

University of Cyprus ▪ Dept. of English Studies ▪ 75, Kallipoleos Ave. ▪ POBox 20537
CY 1678 Nicosia, CYPRUS ▪ +357 22 89 21 24 ▪ gfloros@ucy.ac.cy

Abstract

Parallel texts seem to constitute a contested notion within the framework of disciplines using the term (e.g.

Translation Studies, Interpreting Studies, Corpus Linguistics, Computational Linguistics). Based on an

extended view on the notion of “comparability” which underlies the definition of parallel texts, this paper

will attempt a broader conception of parallel texts, based on their intra- and interlingual dimension, and it

will show their relevance for Translation and Interpreting didactics. An overview of the definition of parallel

texts will be given in the first section, followed by the presentation of an extended definition with applications

in the didactics, and thus the process, of both Translation and Interpreting.

Keywords: comparability, Corpus Linguistics, interlingual, Interpreting, intralingual,

translation didactics, parallel texts

1 Introduction

Parallel texts have been the object of systematic analysis by translation scholars

ever since the emergence of LSP-translation as a subfield of Translation Studies.

As LSP-Translation depends widely on special knowledge management and

terminology, parallel texts have proved to be a very useful source of information

related to the specific use and context of terms. The development of Machine-

1
Floros, G. (2004) “Parallel Texts in Translating and Interpreting”, TSNM (Translation Studies in
the New Millennium) 2(2004), 33-41.

aided Translation and Corpus Linguistics further pointed out the importance of

parallel texts for comparative linguistic examination. Today, parallel texts seem to

offer valuable information and help in the process of all subfields of Translation.

Nevertheless, in order to examine the conditions under which parallel texts can be

used in the translation process, a broader conception of the notion of parallel texts

is needed. On the basis of this conception this paper will attempt to show the

importance of parallel texts for Translation and Interpreting, where the main focus

will be placed.

2 To the notion of parallel texts

A widely accepted definition of parallel texts is given by Hartmann (1980), who

understands them to be corresponding original texts in different languages. This

definition is also proposed by Somers and Jones (1993). According to them,

parallel texts are not identified as originals or translations. Göpferich (1999: 184),

based on the notion given by Wilss (1996: 156ff.), also describes parallel texts as

original texts of different languages, that are written by competent native speakers

in the best of cases, they resemble one another in the topic they discuss and in

their communicative function, i.e. they belong to the same text class, and are not

translations of one another. “Parallel” means “comparable” and according to all

the above definitions, the notion of “comparability” is to be conceived in terms of

2
Floros, G. (2004) “Parallel Texts in Translating and Interpreting”, TSNM (Translation Studies in
the New Millennium) 2(2004), 33-41.

two or more different languages, i.e. interlingually. Thus parallel texts are

assigned an interlingual dimension by definition. In addition, parallel texts are

compared to one another solely on the basis of their linguistic difference, since

their topic, function and context have to remain constant, if they are to be

compared. So, comparison between the linguistic material of each text and the

interlingual dimension are the two main characteristics of parallel texts. However,

in some disciplines, as, for example, in Computational Linguistics, other views

are expressed. Peters, Picchi, and Biagini (1996) use the term “parallel” for an

original text and its translation. Thus a parallel text corpus consists of two texts, in

which one text is the source text and the other its translation. These views

correspond to Baker’s (1995) distinction between parallel corpora and

multilingual corpora, the former being corpora consisting of originals in language

A and their translations in language B (cf. Peters, Picchi, and Biagini 1996) and

the latter being corpora consisting of original texts in language A and original

texts in language B (cf. other definitions above).1

In this paper, the approach that views parallel texts as texts that do not stand in an

original-translation relation to one another will be taken as a starting point. The

question to be examined here is whether the notion of parallel texts can only be

applied interlingually, thus implying that only the linguistic material of texts is

subject to comparison, or whether it would be more appropriate in terms of

3
Floros, G. (2004) “Parallel Texts in Translating and Interpreting”, TSNM (Translation Studies in
the New Millennium) 2(2004), 33-41.

translation didactics to conceive this notion in its intralingual dimension as well.

This would assume that different texts of one and the same language are also

comparable to each other, implying that there are factors other than the language

that can also be compared to one another. These could be the topic, function,

context and situation of each text. In this case, at least one factor should remain

constant in all texts so as to enable the comparison between the other factors. The

constant factor could be the central theme or topic of the texts and all other factors

could constitute points of comparison. Thus the notion of “comparability”, as

identified in parallel texts so far, could be guaranteed and the term “parallel texts”

could also be applied intralingually. This would bring about a distinction between

interlingual parallel texts and intralingual parallel texts. In fact, this is already

postulated in Göpferich in terms of “intralingual contrasting” (1999: 185),

proposed as a prerequisite for “interlingual comparison of parallel texts” (ibid.)2

(cf. also Spillner 1981: 242). However, the distinction between interlingual and

intralingual proposed in this paper concerns the notion of parallel texts itself and

not merely the comparative methodology used for the identification of differences

between text classes. Nevertheless, the crucial question of why such a distinction

would be important still has to be discussed.

There is no doubt that parallel texts and their systematic comparison offer useful

textual databases as a resource for terminology and the systematic investigation of

4
Floros, G. (2004) “Parallel Texts in Translating and Interpreting”, TSNM (Translation Studies in
the New Millennium) 2(2004), 33-41.

textual norms and conventions as well as morphosyntactic differences among

others. Especially for LSP-Translation, terminology extraction and terminology

management are to a great extent dependent on parallel texts comparisons. This is

one of many reasons for the emergence and development of Corpus Linguistics.

But there are also a number of other reasons why parallel texts could be useful

during the translation process. The reality of the translation market proves that

translators often have to switch from one area to another, which means that they

have to be flexible enough to consult a lot of available resources. The problems

that come along with this constant switching do not only concern terminology

and/or information relevant to textual conventions, for which interlingual parallel

texts are a major help, but they also concern microstructural choices that the

translator has to make. The “one to many” equivalence type described by Koller

(1979) is the theoretical expression of a problem translators encounter constantly.

In these cases, very often glossaries and dictionaries have little to say, as, although

they may offer a variety of choices, they still do not offer the guidance needed for

the selection of a specific one. This problem becomes particularly evident in the

didactics of Translation, where students are often frustrated by the fact that they

do not know how to proceed in cases of ambiguities or variety of choices.

Experienced translators know that the solution to the problem is, among others,

the context, but this cannot be taken for granted in the case of students.

5
Floros, G. (2004) “Parallel Texts in Translating and Interpreting”, TSNM (Translation Studies in
the New Millennium) 2(2004), 33-41.

Intralingual parallel texts will definitely be a major help in decision making, as

they provide the context needed to clarify the use of words. The discussion on the

importance of interlingual and intralingual parallel texts can best be continued by

looking at the matter in a more detailed way, as will be attempted below.

3 Parallel texts in Translating

In order to show the importance of parallel texts in the translation process, both

dimensions of parallel texts, the interlingual and the intralingual, will be

considered. For methodological reasons, three aspects of the translation process

will be addressed separately: the microstructural, the macrostructural and the

holistic aspect.

3.1 The microstructural aspect

Interlingual parallel texts have already proved to be a reliable method for the

investigation, extraction, management and documentation of terminology. Apart

from terminology, other microstructural problems such as polysemy or

collocations can best be solved by consulting intralingual parallel texts both of the

source language (for resolving ambiguities) and of the target language (for

decision making). This relates to Koller’s (1979) equivalence types “one to many”

and “many to one”. The various types of contextual information provided by

parallel texts of the same language (intralingual) is undoubtedly very useful both

6
Floros, G. (2004) “Parallel Texts in Translating and Interpreting”, TSNM (Translation Studies in
the New Millennium) 2(2004), 33-41.

retrospectively (analysing/interpreting the source text) and prospectively (decision

making in the target language)3.

3.2 The macrostructural aspect

Regarding the macrostructure of the text the importance of intralingual contrasting

of text classes (Göpferich 1995), which in the present paper would correspond to

intralingual parallel texts, is high because this contrasting is a prerequisite for the

creation and development of monolingual and multilingual corpora and databases

that then form consultable resources for translators. The macrostructural

information provided by the investigation of interlingual and intralingual parallel

texts concerns, among other things, issues of a) thematic structure and patterning

in different text classes of the same language, b) contrastive analysis of thematic

structure in multilingual corpora and c) coherence.

3.3 The holistic aspect

The holistic aspect in the translation process is perhaps the most crucial one, as it

concerns the knowledge (cultural, special or other) activated by and needed for

understanding the source text, and the context of knowledge within which the

target text will function as a translation. Regarding those two issues, the

investigation of intralingual parallel texts seems to be the most suitable method.

Intralingual parallel text of the source language provide the information needed

for developing cultural systems or other knowledge systems around the text in the

7
Floros, G. (2004) “Parallel Texts in Translating and Interpreting”, TSNM (Translation Studies in
the New Millennium) 2(2004), 33-41.

reception phase of the translation process, systems that contain implicit

information from various contexts, complementary to the explicit one in the

source text. In a like manner, intralingual parallel texts of the target language will

constitute the context into which the target text will be embedded in the

reproduction phase of the translation process of not only LSP-texts. (cf.

Gerzymisch-Arbogast 1999 and Floros 2002 & 2003).

4 Parallel texts in Interpreting

For methodological reasons once more, two aspects of Interpreting will be

addressed here: the preparation phase and the ad-hoc situation4. There is no doubt

that the micro-, macrostructural and holistic benefits pointed out for the

translating process would also apply to pedagogical aspects of Interpreting as well,

but in the actual interpreting process, be it consecutive or simultaneous, the time

factor plays an all-important role and therefore brings about a special approach to

the way parallel texts can be used. Intralingual parallel texts play a more

important role in Interpreting than they do in Trasnlating, as will be shown below.

4.1 The preparation phase

Interpreters switch to different areas much more often than translators do and the

need for relevant information to the topics they are expected to cover is acute.

Taking into consideration that interpreters constantly work under time pressure

8
Floros, G. (2004) “Parallel Texts in Translating and Interpreting”, TSNM (Translation Studies in
the New Millennium) 2(2004), 33-41.

even in the preparation phase, interlingual and intralingual parallel texts provide

quick information, focused on the topic to be covered. With interlingual parallel

texts interpreters are able to gather terminological or other information for ad hoc

glossaries, as the search through large databases or corpora would be time-

consuming. With intralingual parallel texts from various contexts interpreters are

able to gather additional general information about the topic to be covered, so as

to quickly gain a better view on a subject they might never have encountered

before. 5

4.2 The ad-hoc situation

It is extremely difficult for interpreters to consult any text or database during the

interpreting process itself. Nevertheless, all source or target language documents

related to the interpreting assignment and handed in to the interpreter just before

can be regarded as interlingual or intralingual parallel texts to function as a tool

during the process, although they cannot be compared to one another

systematically, as is the case during the translation process or in the preparation

phase of the interpreting assignment. In addition, documents gathered in the

preparation or just before the assignment form the basis on which interpreters

work for future assignments and thus constitute possible parallel texts. It is true,

however, that during the interpreting assignment, mostly intralingual parallel texts

9
Floros, G. (2004) “Parallel Texts in Translating and Interpreting”, TSNM (Translation Studies in
the New Millennium) 2(2004), 33-41.

of the target language are likely to be used, as time conditions do not allow for

contrastive analysis.

5 Conclusion

In the translating and interpreting process practical needs call for the use of

parallel texts, which until now were mainly understood as comparable texts in

different languages. The broader conception of parallel texts presented in this

paper described comparable texts of the same language also as parallel texts,

based on the assumption that not only linguistic material, norms and conventions

of texts are comparable to one another, but also contexts and functions. This

conception resulted in the distinction of two separate types of parallel texts, the

interlingual and the intralingual. Thus a theoretical description of what actually

happens in the translation and interpreting practice was made possible.

The above result should be considered in translation and interpreting didactics in a

more systematic way. The aim should be to familiarize both translation and

interpreting students with different types of parallel texts so as to build up their

confidence in using them properly. The present paper did not aim to describe the

methodological aspects of a contrastive analysis of parallel texts but attempted a

first approach to classifying them so as to offer the basis for the development of

specific contrastive approaches.

10
Floros, G. (2004) “Parallel Texts in Translating and Interpreting”, TSNM (Translation Studies in
the New Millennium) 2(2004), 33-41.

6 References

BAKER, Mona. 1995. “Corpora in Translation Studies An Overview and some

Suggestions for Future Research”. Target 7:2. 223-243.

FLOROS, Georgios. 2002. Kulturelle Konstellationen in Texten: Zur

Beschreibung und Übersetzung von Kultur in Texten. Tübingen: Narr.

FLOROS, Georgios. 2003. “Kultur und Übersetzen”. Fleischmann, Eberhard et

al., eds. Translationskompetenz. Tübingen: Narr. 343-352.

GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST, Heidrun. 1999. “Fach-Text-Übersetzen”. Buhl,

Silke and Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, eds. Fach-Text-Übersetzen.

Theorie-Praxis-Didaktik. St. Ingbert: Roehrig. 3-20.

GILE, Daniel. 1995. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator

Training. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: Benjamins.

GÖPFERICH, Susanne. 1999. “Paralleltexte”. Snell-Hornby, Mary, Hans G.

Hönig, Peter Kussmaul and Peter Schmitt, eds. Handbuch Translation.

Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 184-186.

GÖPFERICH, Susanne. 1995. Textsorten in Naturwissenschaften und Technik

Pragmatische Typologie – Kontrastierung – Translation. Tübingen: Narr.

HARTMANN, Reinhard. 1980. Contrastive Textology. Comparative Discourse

Analysis in Applied Linguistics. Heidelberg: Groos.

11
Floros, G. (2004) “Parallel Texts in Translating and Interpreting”, TSNM (Translation Studies in
the New Millennium) 2(2004), 33-41.

KATSOYANNOU, Marianne, Constandina Economou and Georgios Floros.

2004. “Teaching Text-Typological Translation: Tourist Maps”. Proceedings

of the International Conference on “Choice and Difference in Translation”,

Athens, Dec. 2003. (forthcoming).

KOLLER, Werner. 1979/51997. Einführung in die Übersetzungswissenschaft.

Heidelberg – Wiesbaden: Quelle & Meyer.

PETERS, Carol, Eugenio Picchi and Lisa Biagini. 1996. “Parallel and

Comparable Bilingual Corpora in Language Teaching and Learning”.

Botley S., J. Glass, T. McEnery and A. Wilson, eds. Proceedings of

Teaching and Language Corpora 1996. UCREL Technical Papers 9

(Special Issue), Lancaster University 1996. 68-82.

SOMERS, Harold L. and David Jones. 1993. “Machine Translation Seen as

Interactive Multilingual Text Generation”. Translating and the Computer

13: The Theory and Practice of Machine Translation - A Marriage of

Convenience? London: Aslib.

SPILLNER, Bernd. 1981. “Textsorten im Sprachvergleich: Ansätze zu einer

Kontrastiven Textologie”. Kühlwein, Wolfgang, Gisela Thome and

Wolfram Wilss, eds. Kontrastive Linguistik und Übersetzungswissenschaft.

Akten des Internationalen Kolloquiums Trier/Saarbrücken, 25.-30.09.1978.

München: Fink. 239-250.

12
 Floros, G. (2004) “Parallel Texts in Translating and Interpreting”, TSNM (Translation Studies in
the New Millennium) 2(2004), 33-41.

SZABÓ, Csilla, ed. 2003. Interpreting: From Preparation to Performance.

Budapest: British Council.

WILL, Martin. 2000. “Bemerkungen zum Computereinsatz beim

Simultandolmetschen”. Kalina, Sylvia, Silke Buhl and Heidrun

Gerzymisch-Arbogast, eds. Dolmetschen: Theorie – Praxis – Didaktik. St.

Ingbert: Röhrig. 125-135.

WILSS, Wolfram. 1996. Knowledge and Skills in Translator Behaviour.

Amsterdam – Philadelphia: Benjamins.

7 Notes

1
The documents of the European Union institutions, which are simultaneously

produced in all the official languages of the European Union, are also called

parallel texts, thus following the conception by Peters, Picchi, and Biagini (1996).
2
Original citations are in German, here my own translation.
3
Regarding this issue cf. also Katsoyannou/Economou/Floros (2004).
4
This paper does not attempt a precise or detailed description of the phases of the

interpreting process (to this issue cf. Gile 1995: 148ff. and Will 2000: 127f.).
5
On the use of parallel texts for the preparation of an interpreting assignment cf.

Szabó (2003: 136f.).

13

View publication stats