The case of InterCorp, a multilingual parallel corpus

Čermák, František; Rosen, Alexandr

doi:10.1075/ijcl.17.3.05cer

Cited by 58 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(10 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…De-participial secondary prepositions and conjunctions, such as according to, assuming that, concerning, including, regarding, were noted but not included in the data set since they can no longer be considered adverbials or modifiers. The data were drawn from the synchronic multilingual parallel corpus InterCorp, which is being compiled at Charles University in Prague (Čermák and Rosen 2012). The corpus comprises 31 languages, with Czech as the pivot language, i.e.…”

Section: Materials and Scope Of The Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

English non-finite participial clauses as seen through their Czech counterparts

Malá

Šaldová

2015

NJES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on the data from a parallel English-Czech corpus, the present study offers an analysis of 600 English V-ing participial clauses through their Czech translation correspondences, divisible into less and more explicit types. The less explicit Czech counterparts highlight the analytic character of English either in cases where the translation counterpart is synthetic (i.e. merging the meaning of the finite verb and the participle into one verb) or where the participle resembles, in its function, a preposition. The more explicit (i.e. finite-clause) Czech counterparts attest to the backgrounded information status and semantic indeterminacy of the English participial clause. Instead of an expected tendency to render their meaning in Czech by a similar, syntactically subordinated, structure, namely dependent clauses, it is the simple coordination that appears to represent best the semantic indeterminacy of the relation of the English participial clause to its superordinate element. 1 In 1928, in his article in the Theses of the Prague Linguistic Circle Mathesius, drawing a distinction between linguistic characterology (i.e. synchronic comparison of languages) and descriptive grammar, claimed that "[F]or further advancement of linguistic research work it is of vital importance that detailed linguistic characterology of single languages at different stages of their development should be worked up on a purely synchronic basis. [...] Comparison of languages of different types without any regard to their genetic relations is of the greatest value for any work in concrete linguistics characterology" (Mathesius 1928, in Vachek 1964: 60). Mathesius further points out that "the only way of approach to different languages as strictly comparable systems is the functional point of view, since general needs of expression and communication, common to all mankind, are the only common denominators to which means of expression and communication, varying from language to language, can reasonably be brought" (Mathesius 1936: 95).

show abstract

Section: Materials and Scope Of The Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

English non-finite participial clauses as seen through their Czech counterparts

Malá

Šaldová

2015

NJES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Esto quiere decir que herramientas específicas para corpus paralelos, tales como AntPConc, ParaConc o WordSmith Tools, entre otras herramientas habituales para la alineación y gestión de corpus paralelos (Torrellas Castillo, 2009:11;Zanettin, 2012:180;Vigier y Sánchez, 2017:265), no podrán usarse para el presente corpus. En cuanto a otras herramientas que sí admiten archivos en formato tmx, caso de Corpus Query Processor (CQP), InterText o NoSketchEngine (Čermák y Rosen, 2012;Vondřička, 2014;Molés-Cases, 2016:161), se ha descartado su empleo por precisar de trabajo informático especializado para la creación del corpus.…”

Section: Compilación Y Gestión Del Corpusunclassified

Diseño y compilación de corpus paralelos alineados: dificultades y (algunas) soluciones en el ejemplo de un corpus de textos museísticos traducidos (inglés-español)

Rojo

2018

Rev. lingüíst. leng. apl.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resumen: Los corpus de textos son herramientas de larga tradición y numerosas aplicaciones. De todos los tipos existentes, este trabajo se centra en uno en concreto: el corpus paralelo alineado. Tomando como punto de partida un corpus paralelo alineado de textos museísticos escritos originariamente en inglés y traducidos al español, se propone una metodología que pasa por cuatro fases esenciales. Con el apoyo de trabajos previos al respecto, y tras el recurso a programas de software -de pago y gratuitos, específicos y creados con otros fines-, se comprueba que, si bien es posible llevar a cabo la compilación del corpus, el camino está lleno de obstáculos, algunos salvables y otros no, como ha sucedido con la conservación de repeticiones en el corpus alineado.Palabras clave: lingüística de corpus, textos museísticos, traducción, textos paralelos alineados, bitextos. DESIGNING AND COMPILING PARALLEL ALIGNED CORPORA: PITFALLS AND (SOME) SOLUTIONS ON THE EXAMPLE OF A CORPUS OF TRANSLATED MUSEM TEXTS (ENGLISH-SPANISH)Abstract: Text corpora are tools having both a long tradition in research and a variety of applications. Of all existing types, this paper focuses specifically on parallel, aligned corpora. By taking one of this corpora as a starting point-a parallel, aligned corpus from museum texts originally written in English and subsequently translated into Spanish-, the aim of this article is to propose a methodology that consists of four basic stages. By the revision of previous literature on the topic, and by using multiple software programs-proprietary and free, specifically created for corpus compilation and created for other purposes-, it is concluded that, although the compilation of corpora such as the one that was intended is a feasible task, the procedure is full of obstacles. Some obstacles were overcome, while some were not; that is the case, for example, of the repetitions on the aligned corpus, which are not present in the corpus.Key words: corpus linguistics, museum texts, translation, parallel-aligned texts, bitexts. S[ource texts] and T[arget texts] are usually published in separate volumes, or on separate pages […] so that making comparisons between the two requires a good deal of patience. (Harris, 1988, p. 8) INTRODUCCIÓNLa opinión de que la lingüística de corpus ha sido un campo de estudio prolífico desde hace tiempo es unánime. Son numerosos los trabajos que se consideran clásicos en este campo, como es el caso de las contribuciones de Sinclair (1991), Baker (1995), EAGLES (1996) y McEnery y Wilson (2001, primera edición publicada en 1996), por citar solo unos pocos.1 Las investigaciones que hacen uso de los corpus como herramienta metodológica en los últimos años siguen siendo muy numerosas, como lo demuestran Zanettin, Saldanha y Harding (2015:180) en referencia a los estudios de traducción, ya que "in the last ten years or so about 1 out of 10 publications in the field has been concerned with or informed by corpus linguistics methods" (Fantinuoli y Zanettin, 2015:8). Un ejemplo más, ig...

show abstract

“…Complementary literary texts, however, can easily be obtained from InterCorp [3]. The most recent, ninth version contains a section with original Serbian texts.…”

Section: Source Of Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since other relevant criteria for our study are size, morphosyntactic annotation, type and variety of texts, the number of relevant sources drops drastically. srWaC [9] seems currently to be the most suitable source for studies on rarely occurring phenomena 3 . 3 The only alternative is offered by the Corpus of Contemporary Serbian Langauge (version SrpKor2013) developed by Miloš Utvić and Duško Vitas, but it is five times smaller.…”

Section: Source Of Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…srWaC [9] seems currently to be the most suitable source for studies on rarely occurring phenomena 3 . 3 The only alternative is offered by the Corpus of Contemporary Serbian Langauge (version SrpKor2013) developed by Miloš Utvić and Duško Vitas, but it is five times smaller. The quality of metainformation and availability of search options are additional reasons why we excluded this corpus from the current study.…”

Section: Source Of Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Clitic Climbing, Finiteness and the Raising-Control Distinction. A Corpus–based study

Jurkiewicz-Rohrbacher

Hansen

Kolaković

2017

Journal of Linguistics/Jazykovedný Casopis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In the paper, we discuss the phenomenon of clitic climbing out of finite da 2 -complements in contemporary Serbian. Scholars' opinions on the acceptability and occurrence of this construction, based on a handful of self-made examples, vary considerably. Expanding on the assumption that the correctness of the phenomenon has often been denied due to its rareness we employ large corpora to examine the problem. We focus on possible constraints arising from the syntactic properties of clause-embedding predicates.

show abstract

The case of InterCorp, a multilingual parallel corpus

Cited by 58 publications

References 18 publications

English non-finite participial clauses as seen through their Czech counterparts

English non-finite participial clauses as seen through their Czech counterparts

Diseño y compilación de corpus paralelos alineados: dificultades y (algunas) soluciones en el ejemplo de un corpus de textos museísticos traducidos (inglés-español)

Clitic Climbing, Finiteness and the Raising-Control Distinction. A Corpus–based study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About