The Impact of Collocational Competence On Translation Quality: Literature Review Amal Abdelsattar Metwally

AWEJ for Translation & Literary Studies, Volume 7, Number 1. February 2023 Pp.
175-186
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awejtls/vol7no1.13
The Impact of Collocational Competence on Translation Quality:

Literature Review
Amal Abdelsattar Metwally

Department of English Language, Faculty of Languages and Translation
King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia
Corresponding Author: aamotwly@kku.edu.sa
Mona M. Hamad
Department of English Language, College of Science & Arts
King Khalid University, Muhayil, Saudi Arabia
Received:11/09/2022 Accepted:01/31/2023 Published:02/24/2023
Abstract
This study reviews the literature on the significance of collocational competence on the quality of
translation, being a meaningful lexical relationship between words. Though the value of
recognizing collocations in translation is well acknowledged, several earlier studies have
underlined students' lack of collocational competence and the difficulties they encounter when
dealing with collocations in the translation process. The current study evaluates previous research
in this field and examines the influence of lexical and grammatical collocation knowledge in
translation from English into Arabic and vice versa. The significance of this review lies in
exploring the importance of a translator's collocational expertise in accurately translating lexical
and grammatical collocations in the target language. This review aims at answering the review
question: How does collocational competence affect translation quality? To answer this question,
the researchers examined many studies investigating the impact of collocational competence on
the quality of translation. The review further aims at increasing awareness of the significance of
this aspect of translation accuracy. The review study provides an overview of pertinent
terminology and classifications and a brief introduction to the subject. Then follows an overview
of the significance of collocations competence for ensuring the quality of the translation. The final
section includes recommendations for translation instructors as well as translators. The review’s
findings showed a substantial correlation between the quality of the translation and the adequate
knowledge of lexical and grammatical collocations.
Keywords: Collocational competence, lexical collocations, grammatical collocations, translation
process, translation quality, literature review
Cite as: Metwally, A. A., & Hamad, M. M. (2023). The Impact of Collocational Competence on
Translation Quality: Literature Review Arab World English Journal for Translation & Literary
Studies 7 (1): 175-186. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awejtls/vol7no1.13
Arab World English Journal for Translation & Literary Studies 175
ISSN: 2550-1542 |www.awej-tls.org
AWEJ for Translation & Literary Studies Volume, 7 Number 1. February 2023
The Impact of Collocational Competence on Translation Quality Metwally & Hamad
Introduction
Collocations are one of the toughest challenges that translators must overcome.
Unfortunately, it is not always simple to locate the precise equivalents of SL collocations in the
TL since languages have historically developed their collocations in varied, distinctive, and often
arbitrary ways.
While research on collocations has received much attention, there has not been much focus
on translating collocations between languages, particularly between English and Arabic and vice
versa (Bahumaid, 2006). Collocations are crucial to language teaching and learning. One's ability
to communicate more effortlessly and eloquently is substantially enhanced by having a solid
command of collocations Additionally, translating collocations involves other essential aspects
(i.e., language proficiency, context, register, culture, and so forth). Therefore, to effectively handle
collocations in translation, one must first have a thorough understanding of these concepts. To
render an accurate translation of collocations in the Target Language (TL), the translator must first
identify and understand them in the Source Language (SL), especially collocations that are
culturally and linguistically specific.
The main aim of this study is to investigate the importance of the translator’s collocational
competence and how this knowledge affects translation quality. This review studies the
significance of a translator’s collocational knowledge in rendering lexical and grammatical
collocations authentically in the target language. The approaches taken by the translators and their
capacity to work within the confines of these approaches are one of the criteria used to evaluate or
assess a translation. To this end, this review paper attempts to answer the question: How does
collocational competence affect translation quality?
To answer this question, the paper is structured as a systematic literature review that aims
to locate and synthesize research that bears on the study question, using organized procedures. The
literature review is subdivided into two main sections. The first is a review of significant studies
on collocations, their classifications in English and Arabic, and the factors affecting the translation
of collocations. The second section reviews recent studies on the translation of collocations and
emphasizes the crucial role of collocational competence in rendering accurate translations.
Review of Literature
The impact of collocational competence on translation quality has yet to be closely studied
in the context of translation from English into Arabic and vice versa. The researchers review
various studies to find the previous literature investigating the impact of collocational competence
on the quality of translation. This section reviews studies on collocations and their categorization,
studies on collocations in English and Arabic, studies on translating culture-specific expressions
and investigating the relationship between translation and culture, reflections on translating
collocations, and the critical factors affecting the process of translation. The review ends with
recent studies on translating collocations to arrive at specific recommendations to be discussed in
the following section.
Studies on Collocations and their Categorization

Palmer (1933) was the first to study English collocations, and he referred to this
phenomenon as a ‘succession of two or more words that must be learned as an integral whole, and
not pieced together from its component parts’(Palmer, 1933, p. 5). The concept of collocations—
ISSN: 2550-1542 | www.awej-tls.org
words whose meanings are connected by their proximity to one another—was first introduced by
linguist Firth in 1957, and the Firthian definition, "the company that words keep," is the most well-
known one for English collocations (Firth, 1968, p. 182).
In defining collocations, Cruse (1986) stated that they are a "sequence of lexical items
which routinely co-occur, but which still are fully transparent in the sense that each lexical
constituent is likewise a semantic constituent" (p. 40). Nattinger and Decarrio (1992) argued that
"It has been a practice in linguistics to classify words not only on the basis of their meaning, but
also on the basis of their co-occurrence with other words, and in this way to search for increasingly
delicate word classes” (p. 20). Lewis (1998) illustrated that collocations have three categories.
Many collocations are “strong”. For example, we most commonly talk of rancid butter, but that
does not mean that other things cannot be rancid. The second category is collocations that may be
described as “weak collocations”. These are words that co-occur with a greater than random
frequency. Many things can be long or short, cheap or expensive, good or bad. However,
collocations are more predictable. An example is white wine or red wine. The third category is
collocations of “medium strength”, and these are the words that go together with a greater
frequency than weak collocations. Some examples are holding a meeting or carrying out a study.
It would be futile to attempt to draw a clear distinguishing line between collocations that are
predictable from the meanings of the words that co-occur and those that are not. One can provide
a semantic explanation for even the more restricted collocations by assigning particular importance
to the individual words. We can thus explain white coffee, white wine, and white people by
suggesting that white means something like “with the lightest of the normal colors associated with
the entity” (Palmer, 1981, p. 77).
Newmark (1998) distinguishes two categories of collocations. Syntactic collocations are
the first category, which, in his opinion, correspond to two or three words that are commonly used
together and are of greater importance to the translator. Examples of these collocations include
green memories and delivering a letter. The second category is the discoursal collocates, which
refer to elements of a particular lexical frame or field. Since discoursal collocates are limited to a
particular discourse, they are fundamental to the translation process.
Additionally, Cowie and McCaig (1983) divided collocations into three categories. One
lexical item having a figurative sense not found outside that limited context is described as the first
form of "restricted collocation," according to their explanation. They note that one of the elements
in a "limited collocation" may be either literal or figurative. For instance, it could be argued that
the verb "explode" in the phrase "explode a myth/a belief" has a figurative meaning. They
concluded that "the choice of the specialized meaning of the verb, which means ‘show to be untrue
or no longer true,' is contextually determined by occurring inside no other lexical context than that
of ‘myth/belief'. The second kind of collocation is "bound collocation," which is "a bridge category
between collocations and idioms". This collocation exhibits distinctive contextual determination;
in other words, “one of the parts is uniquely selective of the other" (p.228). Through repeated,
context-dependent use, certain expressions become partially fixed. For instance, the phrase "shrug
shoulders" is a constrained collocation where the word "shrug" is selective of the word "shoulder,"
as in "when I asked her if she minds remaining home, she just shrugged her shoulders" (p.228).
Benson, Benson, and Ilson (1986) explained the contrast between "grammatical
collocations” and "lexical collocations". The term "grammatical collocation" refers to collocations
in which a grammatical lexical item, usually a preposition, follows a dominant lexical item, such
as a noun or verb, and where the meanings of the prepositions "in the collocations" are
unpredictable (p. 43). This distinction demonstrates the metaphorical nature of specific linguistic
constructions. The phrases "look after and look up to" are examples of a verb-particle combination
or phrasal verb. Lexical collocations are grammatical constructions where the collocates are not
"restricted" or "semi-restricted" and often have two equal lexical components. Since these
grammatical constructs are "open collocations," the meaning is not idiomatic. Examples include
noun-verb pairings like "bells ring" or adjective-noun combinations like "intense competition”
(p.43). A lexical item's meaning in a "lexical collocation" is predictable; as a result, it is not
idiomatic and could be easily handled in translation. Similarly, Baker (1992) distinguished
between “restricted collocations”, or words that co-occur according to “semantically arbitrary
restrictions which do not follow logically from the propositional meaning of a word” (p.14), and
“marked collocations,” which are the unusual combinations of words that “involve deliberate
confusion of collocational ranges to create new images” (p. 51). These new images created by
“marked collocations”, constitute an obstacle to inexperienced translators. Such a category of
collocations is primarily used in literary language and technical articles as in poetry, fiction, and
advertisement. According to Metwally and El-Gemei (2022), “restricted, semi-restricted and
bound collocations” are metaphorical because they acquire a non-literal meaning, while
“unrestricted and open collocations” are not because they collocate with no restriction while
maintaining the literal meaning of their collocates. As such, this classification should be
recognized in the translation process to produce a target text of high quality.
Collocations in English and Arabic

According to Sinclair (1991), a collocation is composed of three components: a "node" that
contains collocations, a "span" that he defines as "the number of lexical items on each side of a
node that we consider important to that node," and "collocates"—things in the environment created
by the span. On the other hand, the collocational vocabulary of Arabic is extensive. Most Arabic
collocations are from the Quran, Sunna (Sayings of the Prophet Mohammad, peace be upon him),
and Classical Arabic literature (Ghazalah, 2004). The classification of Arabic collocations into
multiple groups based on various criteria is similar to how English collocations have been
categorized. For example, Emery (1991) classified Arabic collocations into “open, restricted,
bound, and idioms”. Open collocations are combinations of two or more words that co-occur
without any specific relation between them. Both elements are freely re-combinable, and each part
is used in a literal common sense. An example of open collocations is the use of the noun ‫الحرب‬
with the verbs ‫ بدأت‬and ‫(انتهت‬i.e., the war started/ended). The second type is “restricted
collocations”, which are combinations of two or more words that are employed in one of their
common, non-idiomatic meanings, follow specific structural patterns, and are constrained in their
commutability by usage in addition to grammatical and semantic valence. An example is the use
of the adjective ‫ نكراء‬in collocation with the noun ‫(جريمة‬i.e., heinous crime). Similarly, El-Gemei
(2006) provided evidence that words are semantically related to one another when she commented
on a concept like "blooming" that is only associated with plants. “Bound collocations,” the third
type, is a link between idioms and collocations. Uniquely, one of the elements chooses the other
as in the expression ‫( أطرق الرأس‬i.e., tilted his head to his chest and remained silent or lowered his
eyes to the ground and refrained from speaking). The fourth type is “idioms,” which usually have
“opaque” constituent elements forming a single semantic unit. For this reason, they present a
challenge to translators because their meaning is unclear. Due to the semantic connections between
words, Baker (2011) observed that translators might mistranslate the "source message" of
collocation under the influence of their mother tongue.
The Relationship between Translation and Culture

Translation is conceptualized as a means of broadening one's cultural horizons. Delille
defines this frame of view as follows: “If you translate, you import the riches contained in foreign
languages into your own, by means of felicitous commerce” (As cited in Lefevere, 1992 a, p. 37).
Understanding the cultural background of a target language and its collocational structure is
necessary for translating it in a meaningful way. In other words, understanding the difficulties
brought on by cultural variations aids the translator in producing a high-quality translation. The
translation process should take cultural equivalency into account. Nida (1964) confirmed that
“Differences between cultures may cause more serious problems for the translator than do
differences in language structure” (p. 130).
It is the role of the translator to identify culturally specific collocations and choose the best
ways to convey their meanings in the target language. According to Baker (1992), there is a chance
for the source text to "contain collocations which transmit what to the target reader would be new
connections of ideas" when there are significant cultural differences between the source and target
languages (p.59). For this reason, Baker advises offering the target reader hints to aid in his
interpretation of the translation of culturally specific collocations. According to Nida (1964),
translation issues are likely to arise depending on the cultural and linguistic differences between
the two languages. As a result, the linguistic and cultural distinctions between the SL and the TL
must be given equal weight. While some believe that culture is the core of translation, according
to Newmark (2001), culture is “the largest barrier to translation, at least to the creation of an
accurate and competent translation” (p. 328). He (1988) also emphasized that multi-word
idiomatic statements are among the hardest to translate (p. 104). Asiri and Metwally (2020)
concluded that cultural errors could occur due to inadequate reproduction of culture-specific
expressions, while linguistic translation errors are caused by inadequate production of language
forms. As such, in the process of translation education, “much attention should be given to
students’ perception of the power of culture in transferring meaning from the ST (source text) to
the TT (target text), in order to build their translation competence” (p. 518).
Studies on Translating Collocations

Although translating collocations is a very intriguing activity for the translator's job,
Ghazalah (2004) claimed that it is also challenging and demanding. For this reason, he advises
translators to pay close attention to all forms of collocations and to be exceedingly cautious in the
process of translation. When language-specific collocations are not adequately analyzed, Abdul-
Raof (2001) contended, lexical collocational errors in translation are likely to occur. For example,
a common collocation that is acceptable in one language may be considered inappropriate in
another. Using the English word "heavy" as an example, he lists some common nouns that go well
with it. The Arabic translation of the collocations showed that most of the nouns collocate with
different adjectives except the nouns: ‫ وزن‬،‫ مدفعية‬، ‫ صناعة‬،‫وجبة‬that conventionally co-occur with
the adjective “‫ ثقيل‬،‫ ”ثقيلة‬in order to reflect the same collocational meanings as their English
equivalents.
According to Hatim and Mason (1990), there is always a risk that even the most
experienced translators may periodically fail to recognize SL unnatural collocation, which will
weaken the translation. Mahmoud (2005) presented empirical data verifying the informal
observations and theoretic assertions that EFL learners produce 'unnatural' word combinations.
Most of the incorrect combinations were due to negative transfer from Arabic. The findings of this
study indicate that there is a necessity for direct teaching of collocations, the inclusion of bilingual
glossaries in the EFL course books and designing bilingual collocation dictionaries. Baker (1992)
illustrates that the translator may "become occasionally highly engaged in the source text and may
develop the weirdest collocations in the target language for no justifiable cause" (p.55). This could
be avoided if the translator takes the necessary precautions to be aware of the potential influence
of ST patterns before carefully revising the TT and approaching it in the same manner as a target
reader who has not been exposed to or influenced by the ST. Husni and Newman (2015)
emphasized that collocations frequently include cultural or linguistic distinctiveness, which could
present a challenge for translators. For this reason, second language learners gradually lose the
ability to distinguish collocations and interpret them into their constituents’ literal meaning instead
of thinking about their connotative meaning, which will affect the quality of the translation.
Context is quite essential in influencing collocation choice or selection. According to
Ghazalah (2004), one who deals with the translation of collocations must pay close attention to the
context(s) in which they are employed. He specified three different contexts: the religious context,
the technical context, and the literary setting, each of which has particular qualities and,
consequently, unique collocations. According to Hatim and Mason (1997), the employment of
collocations is crucial to the coherence and cohesion of texts. For instance, combining textual
elements that do not naturally correspond in a given language may make the text appear strange to
the intended reader, which may adversely influence its ability to be understood. This might also
be detrimental to the text's thematic organization and its overall coherence and cohesion. Shapiro
sees translation as an “attempt to produce a text so transparent that it does not seem to be
translated” (As cited in Venuti 1995, p.1). This kind of transparent translation that adopts a
domesticating strategy gives the reader a chance to enjoy the TT more since it “moves the author
towards him,” as Schleiermacher stated (As cited in Shuttleworth & Cowie, 1997, p.44).
Recent Studies on Translation and Collocations

Many recent studies were conducted on the impact of collocational competence on the
produced quality of translation. Bannur, Akkila, and Elwafi (2022) explored the Libyan
undergraduates’ capability to comprehend English collocations and phrasal verbs, translate them
into Arabic and investigate the types of obstacles that these students encounter when they translate
English collocational expressions. The study concluded that the participants faced difficulties
translating English collocations and phrasal verbs. In addition, the translation production reveals
that grammatical, lexical, and cultural aspects were the main problematic areas identified in
students’ answers. These problems are related to the influence of the SL (Arabic), lack of
appropriate vocabulary, difficulty in understanding vocabulary use, lack of translation practice,
and the misuse of literal translation and translation teaching methods. However, though the cultural
gap between SL (Arabic) and TL (English) is huge, the study suggests that it could be minimized
and bridged by using new techniques in introducing the students to collocations and the importance
of recognizing them in the process of translation as well as frequent practice in translation.
Wei, Chang, Yang, and Hsu’s (2022) attempt was made to clarify the relationship between
learners’ collocation competence and textual translation ability. The paper examines Chinese EFL
university learners’ collocation knowledge and their textual translation ability before and
following the treatment of collocation-based instruction. This study also observes the correlation
between Chinese EFL university learners’ collocation knowledge and their textual translation
ability. It explores the effects of instruction adopting an online English collocation dictionary on
Chinese university learners’ textual translation ability. The results suggested that a significant
improvement was found in collocation knowledge and textual translation ability. In addition,
collocation knowledge and textual translation ability were found to be significantly and positively
correlated. Hence, the research outcomes substantially provided pieces of evidence of the
relationship between collocation competence and textual translation ability. These findings can
benefit EFL teaching by offering writing teachers practical guidance on how collocation
knowledge enables it to serve as an optimal solution to EFL learners’ problem with textual
translation production.
Another study was conducted by Adam and Bashrie (2021) to examine collocation
contrastively in both English and Arabic in terms of translation, interpretation, and lexicography.
They highlighted how to deal with collocations in translation by reviewing different translation
strategies (i.e., idiomatic approach, literal approach, non-collocation to collocation approach,
calque, modulation, equivalence, exploitation, transposition, and paraphrase). They concluded that
there are no fixed translation strategies that translators can adopt when rendering SL lexical
collocations into Arabic. “While some strategies are helpful, others turn out to be of little avail”
(p. 9). The study concludes with some recommendations that could reinforce translation and the
teaching/ learning process. They suggested avoiding literal translation when translating
collocations found in literary writings. Additional techniques that aid in creating dynamic
equivalence with literary style in TL ought to be employed. Furthermore, the most crucial approach
to using collocations is the one that focuses on communicating the message's inherent meanings
rather than just using words. They added that it is necessary to consider other text types, including
those related to business, law, and science. According to them, these recommendations, if best
implemented, can improve the quality of the teaching, learning, and translating of collocations.
Trang, Anh, and Khanh (2021) conducted a study to investigate the English collocations
used in written translation among fourth-year English majors at a university. The researchers used
two instruments. The first is a test of English collocations, including five types of collocations: an
adjective going with a noun, a verb going with a noun, a noun going with a verb, a noun going
with a noun, and a verb going with an adverb. The findings of this study showed that just slightly
over half of the student participants could find the correct collocations in written translation.
Furthermore, a noun going with a verb and a noun going with a noun are the two main lexical
errors made by most of the students. The second instrument is an interview used to seek translation
teachers’ perspectives on students’ ability to translate texts in general and strategies of translation.
They perceived that most of their students were unaware of collocations in written translation and
still had difficulties in both grammatical and lexical collocations.
Most importantly, Putri (2019) explored the kinds of errors faced by translators and the
causes of these errors. The researcher found that the most dominant types of errors in translation
experienced by the translators lie in the surface structure, such as semantic, lexical, morphology,
and grammar errors. However, a different kind of errors in translation are errors in the deep
structure, which relates to cultural differences between both SL and TL. The second contribution
is about the causes of error in translation. The most common cause is a lack of knowledge about
the linguistic aspect of the target language, which can cause fatal mistakes. Another primary factor
is the anxiety of the translators themselves, which causes translation errors.
In studying collocations, Bin Naser (2017) illustrated the semantic and syntactic nature of
collocations and the linguistic features’ effect on translation in both Arabic and English. The
findings have shown that collocations are not open to any words, as they co-habit with a limited
range of terms which is the authentic translation crisis for the translator. These findings were
supported by a proposed lexicographical model for collocation translation, which could improve
the way Arab translators transfer English and Arabic collocations when encountered during the
translation process.
Elhajahmed (2017) investigated, analyzed, and classified lexical and textual translation
difficulties encountered by professional diploma students at the Islamic University of Gaza (IUG).
The results showed that professional diploma students committed lexical and textual problems.
Lexical problems include wrong word choice or wrong lexis and collocation, while textual
problems include non-parallel structures, omissions, lexical repetition, redundant pronouns, and
incongruent information.
Interestingly, a study was conducted by Melnichuk and Osipova (2016) to explore the role
of background culture and lexical knowledge in economic translation. The results of this study
pointed out those economic terms, which are difficult to understand and translate. Consequently,
specific training is needed in these areas of difficulty. Synonymous, polysemantic words,
collocations, metaphors, idioms, and abbreviations are the main lexical obstacles in translation as
they make the text difficult to comprehend and translate. Research findings also have pedagogical
implications on teaching ESP partly through translation tasks. The study shows that academic
curricula, learning materials and training focus should be constantly revised and updated in
compliance with today’s market needs.
Giaber (2015) studied the nature of the lexical choices used by Baalbaki in translating “A
Farewell to Arms” by Hemingway into Arabic and their implications for the novel and its readers.
The results of this paper show that M. Baalbaki uses unfamiliar Classical Arabic words,
collocations, and Arabic lexical items of Islamic religious connotations. These choices have
changed the level of discourse in the novel from informal and/or semi-formal to highly formal and
have added an Islamic flavor to the book.
Boonyasaquan (2009) engaged in research to raise awareness in teaching collocations to
EFL/ESL students among teachers, curriculum writers, and related personnel, in the belief that
collocations play a crucial role in learning the English language. The author presents the results of
her research on collocational violations in translation by demonstrating the patterns of the
violations and attempting to give plausible accounts for the errors to help avoid problems in
learning a foreign/second language and promote effective communication.
In their study, Gorgis and Al-Kharabsheh (2009) focused on finding out the extent to which
students of translation can translate Arabic contextualized collocations into English correctly; two
conflicting views about carrying out a translation task are tested. The two conflicting views are
that avoiding using a dictionary in test sessions would save time and yield better translation
products. In contrast, the other view contends that recourse to a dictionary is unavoidable for any
translation task.
The researchers used the systematic qualitative method to review the previous studies in
order to determine the impact of collocational competence on the quality of translation. They
highlighted the fundamental issues of translating collocations and ways to avoid translation
inaccuracies due to collocational incompetence. The results of this review might help educators of
translation and translation students to be aware of the problems in translating collocations and
ways of improving the quality of translation.
Discussion
From the review of the literature, it is perspicuous that collocational knowledge and
proficiency significantly influence the quality of the translation. The impact of collocational
competency on translation and how it can improve the quality of translation were examined in
several studies by the researchers. The findings showed that the translator's most crucial step is to
recognize the collocations used in the ST and assess their meanings in the light of the surrounding
context. Additionally, the translator should use the theory that best serves the translation's
objectives while taking the ST's context, register, and nature into account. Given that collocations
may be a powerful tool for assisting the translator in accurately communicating the ST, the
assessment found that the translator's proficiency with collocations could be utilized as a gauge of
translation quality.
Collocations are found to be difficult for non-native speakers to translate for several reasons.
First, they are primarily non-literal idiomatic structures that cannot be easily translated. Restricted
collocations (Palmer, 1981; Cowie and Macaig, 1983, and Baker, 1992) constitute a challenge in
the translation process because they are “metaphorical” structures (Metwally and El-Gemei, 2022).
Second, collocations are mostly culture-specific. As indicated by Newmark (2001), culture is “the
largest barrier to translation,” at least to the production of a high-quality, competent translation”
(p. 328). Third and most importantly, most translation students struggle with grammatical and
lexical collocations and are unaware of collocations in written translation (Trang, Anh, and Khanh,
2021).
Collocational proficiency varies among translators in their linguistic and cultural knowledge
of the words that conventionally occur together to deliver particular meanings in the TL. It was
found that collocations should be given more consideration, especially by translators, as
proficiency with collocations enhances and solidifies a translator's overall language proficiency.
Translators must not only handle ST collocations correctly and render them in the target language
TT but also use more appropriate TL collocations to create appealing and expressive "writings"
instead of simple translations that change ST words into TL ones. It is recommended for translators
to adhere to the "domestication" method (Venuti, 1995) to become "invisible" and make the TT
seem more natural to the target readers. Competence in collocations would enable translators and
translation students to produce quality translations. To this end, academic curricula, instructional
materials, and training emphasis should be continuously updated. Correct collocation usage
contributes substantially to one's idiomaticity, according to James (1998, p. 152, as cited in
Mahmoud, 2005). The employment of appropriate and proper collocations distinguishes a native
speaker from a proficient language student who can only retain grammar correctness.
Collocations are far more crucial for language learning and translation success in terms of
use, acquisition, and quality. Some collocations have a particular function in establishing lexical
coherence (Hatim & Mason, 1997). "The more common the collocational pattern, the more
coherent the resulting text" (p.47), they asserted. According to Wei et al. (2022), textual translation
skills and collocation knowledge were found to be strongly and positively associated. As such, this
review of literature pinpoints that the intensive practice of translation as an interlingual and
intercultural communication must be strengthened at the lexical and linguistic level.
Conclusion
This review investigated the use of collocations as a gauge of the competency and quality
of the translation. The study examined the implications of sensible collocation selection and the
influence they might have on translation quality. It was comprehensible that a translation's usage
of more collocations indicates a more experienced translator and, consequently, a higher quality
of the translation. Additionally, the appropriate choice of collocations shows that the translator has
a deeper comprehension of the ST and the capacity to accurately translate it into the TL in addition
to reflecting the ST's direct meanings. When SL collocations are adequately understood and
translated into the TL, their meanings are crystallized, and naturalness in the TT is preserved.
Finally, collocation competency is of considerable importance to retain and represent not only the
ST meanings in translation, but also many other aspects, including naturalness, coherence, and
cohesion. As a result, the successful translator is the one who can use TL collocations to their
fullest potential in the target language by wisely and deliberately incorporating them into the target
text. The intended reader will find the TT to read more naturally the more familiar the collocations
employed. This literature review offered the groundwork for further research on the interaction
between culture and collocation while considering the translation of culturally specific terms.
About the Authors:

Amal Abdelsattar Metwally is currently an Assistant Professor at the faculty of languages and
translation, King Khalid University in Abha. She got her Ph.D. in Corpus Linguistics and her MA
in Translation. She is a certified IELTS and TOFEL trainer. She has taught many language skills,
linguistics, and translation courses. She has also published several papers in international journals,
and she has always been interested in applied linguistics, computational linguistics, translation,
and CALL (Computer-Assisted Language Learning).
Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9067-3273
Mona M. Hamad is a Ph.D. holder in “Curriculum & Teaching Methods of English Language”.
She has been working as Assistant Professor at King Khalid University, Muhayil, English
Department since 2012. She has been awarded King Khalid University Award for Excellence in
the field of teaching, faculty member branch in its seventh session 1442/ 2022. Currently, she is
working as the deputy of the English Department. Sudan, Khartoum from 2010-2012. Dr. Hamad
is a member of KSAALT /TESOL (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Association of English Language
Teachers) & ASTEL (Association of Sudanese Teachers of English Language).
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3824-6730
References
Abdul-Raof, H. (2001). Arabic Stylistics: A Course book. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlage.
Adam, A. A., & Bashrie, N. T. (2021). Analysing the Relationship of Collocational Competence
to Translation Accuracy: A Contrastive Analysis. Sust Journal of Linguistics and Literary
Studies, 22(2), 272-285. Available at

http://repository.sustech.edu/handle/123456789/26066.
Asiri, S. A. M. & Metwally, A. A. (2020). The impact of linguistic and cultural competence on
translation quality: Pedagogical insights into translation problems. Journal of Language
Teaching and Research, 11(3), pp. 509-520.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1103.22
Bahumaid, S. (2006). Collocations in English – Arabic translation. Babel, 52(2), 133-152.
Available at
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233645159_Collocation_in_English-
Arabic_Translation
Baker, C. (2011). Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism (Vol. 79). Bristol:
Multilingual
Matters. Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/content/qt04z9b0zc/qt04z9b0zc.pdf
Baker, M. (1992). In Other Words: A Course book on Translation. (Electronic version) Florence,
KY, USA: Routledge. Available at http://site.ebrary.com/lib/aus/doc
Bannur, F. M., Akkila, D. A., & Elwafi, F. M. (2022). Types of Problematics that Affect
Undergraduates' Competence in Translating English Collocations and Phrasal Verbs.
FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching, 3(1), 26-43. Available at
https://foster.pbi-iainpalopo.ac.id/index.php/contents/article/view/67/51
Benson, M., Benson, E., & Ilson, R. F. (1986). Lexicographic description of English (Vol. 14).
John
Benjamins Publishing. Available at https://benjamins.com/catalog/slcs.14
Bin Naser, M. (2017). Co-habitality in Translation: The Comparative Case of Collocations. Arab
World English Journal (AWEJ), 1(2),107-122. Available at https://awej-tls.org/co-
habitality-in-translation-the-comparative-case-of-collocations/
Boonyasaquan, S. (2009). An analysis of collocational violations in translation. (MANUTSAT
PARITAT: Journal of Humanities), 27(2). Retrieved from
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/228504145.pdf
Cowie, A.P., Mackin, R., & McCaig, I. (1983). Oxford Dictionary of Current Idiomatic English,
ii. London: Oxford University Press.
Cruse, D. A. (1986). Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
El-Gemei, D. (2006). Collocation. In: Versteegh, K. et al. (eds). Encyclopaedia of Arabic
Language and Linguistics, 1. Leiden: Brill. 434-439.
Elhajahmed, M. S. (2017). Lexical and Textual Translation Problems Encountered by Palestinian
Professional Diploma Students at the Islamic University of Gaza. IUG Journal of
Humanities Research, 25(2), 1-13. Available at https://search.emarefa.net/detail/BIM-
790338
Emery, P. G. (1991). Collocation in Modern Standard Arabic. ZAL, 23, 56-65.
Firth, J.R. (1968). Selected papers of J.R. Firth 1952-59. California: Indiana University Press.
Ghazalah, H. (2004). Cross-Cultural Link in Translation (English-Arabic). In H. Ghazalah (Ed.),
Essays in Translation and Stylistics (pp.79-115). Beirut: Dar El-Ilm LilMalayin
Giaber, J. M. (2015). Implications of Lexical Choices in Translating Novels as Literary Texts.
The Case of a Farewell to Arms in Arabic, 8(2), 415-445. Retrieved from
http://www.trans-kom.eu/bd08nr02/trans-kom_08_02_05_Giaber_Novels.20151211.pdf
Gorgis, D. T., & Al-Kharabsheh, A. (2009). The translation of Arabic collocations into English:
Dictionary-based vs. dictionary-free measured knowledge. Linguistik online, 37(1), 21-33.
Hatim, B., & Mason, I. (1990). Discourse and the Translation. London: Longman
Hatim, B., & Mason, I. (1997). The Translator as a Communicator. London and New York:
Routledge.
Husni, R., & Newman, D. (2015). Arabic-English-Arabic Translation: Issues and strategies.
London: Routledge.
Lefevere, A. (1992). Translation, history and culture: A sourcebook. New York: Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203417607
Lewis, M. (1998). Implementing the lexical approach. London: Language Teaching Publications.
Mahmoud, A. M. (2005). Collocations Errors Made by Arab Learners of English. Asian- EFL
Journal,5(2), 117-126. Available at
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261961111_Collocation_errors_made_by_Arab_lea
rners_of_English
Melnichuk, M. V., & Osipova, V. M. (2016). The role of background culture and lexical knowledge
in economic translation. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 11(7),
2503-2514. Retrieved from ttps://www.iejme.com/download/the-role-of-background-
culture-and-lexical-knowledge-in-economic-translation.pdf
Metwally, A.A., & El-Gemei, D.M. (2022). A Corpus-based Grammatical Investigation towards a
Computational Identification of Metaphor. Indonesian Journal of English Language
Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 227-248
Nattinger J, R. J., & Decarrio, S. J. (1992). Lexical phrase and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Newmark, P. (1998). Approaches to Translation. Cambridge: Prentice Hall.
Newmark, P. (2001). A Textbook of Translation. Shanghai.
Nida, E. (1964). Toward a Science of Translating. Brill.
Palmer, H. E. (1933). Second interim report on English collocations. Tenth Annual Conference of
English Teachers, Tokyo.
Palmer, F. R. (1981). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from
http://www.mrdowoportal.com/uploads/1/0/1/8/10183165/palmer__f.r._-_semantics-
a_new_outline.pdf.
Putri, T. A. (2019). An Analysis of Types and Causes of Translation Errors. ETNOLINGUAL, 3(2),
93-103.
Shuttleworth, M., & Cowie, M. (1997). Dictionary of Translation Studies. Manchester, UK: St
Jerome Publishing. 69
Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus concordance collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Trang, N. H., Anh, K. H., & Khanh, T. N. (2021). The Use of English Collocations in Written
Translation--A Case of University English-Majored Students. International Journal of
Higher Education, 10(1), 252-272. Retrieved from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1286012.pdf
Venuti, L. (1995). The Translator’s Invisibility. London: Routledge
Wei, L., Chang, C., Yang, C., & Hsu, S. (2022). Undertaking Online Collocation Dictionary to
Enhance Textual Translation Ability: An Experimental Study of Mainland Chinese EFL
Learners. Journal of China-ASEAN Studies (JCAS), 1(2), 48-60. Retrieved from
https://so07.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/JCAS/article/view/1424

The Impact of Collocational Competence On Translation Quality: Literature Review Amal Abdelsattar Metwally

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Impact of Collocational Competence On Translation Quality: Literature Review Amal Abdelsattar Metwally

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Impact of Collocational Competence On Translation Quality: Literature Review Amal Abdelsattar Metwally

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AWEJ for Translation & Literary Studies, Volume 7, Number 1. February 2023 Pp.

The Impact of Collocational Competence on Translation Quality:

Amal Abdelsattar Metwally

Received:11/09/2022 Accepted:01/31/2023 Published:02/24/2023

Studies on Collocations and their Categorization

Collocations in English and Arabic

The Relationship between Translation and Culture

Studies on Translating Collocations

Recent Studies on Translation and Collocations

About the Authors:

Studies, 22(2), 272-285. Available at

You might also like