본 연구는 번역 언어의 보편적 특징으로 논의된 명시화(explicitation)가 한중 번역과 모든 의미관계 번역에서 관찰되는지 검증하는 데 목적이 있다. 이를 위해 명시화를 텍스트 결속성(cohesion)에 기여하는 접속기제(connective)로 정의하고, 한중 번역 신문사설 원문과 번역문, 비번역 중국어 신문사설로 구성된 혼합코퍼스를 구축하여 비교한다. 먼저, 번역문과 비번역문의 전체 접속기제 빈도와 의미관계별 빈도를 비교하고 유의수준 5%로 통계 검정을 실시한다. 다음으로 번역문에 고빈도로 출현한 접속기제와 의미관계를 대상으로 원문과 번역문을 비교하여 번역과정에서 접속기제가 추가, 구체화된 빈도를 집계한다. 이를 통해 실제 번역과정의 명시화 결과로 해당 접속기제와 의미관계가 번역문에서 고빈도로 출현한 것인지 판단한다. 이후 번역과정 명시화를 검증하는 과정에서 관찰된 번역유형을 원문과 번역문의 문맥을 비교하며 각 문맥에서 변이가 나타난 동기와 효과를 구체적으로 설명한다.
A Corpus-based Analysis of Explicitation in Korean-Chinese translation of newspaper editorials : Focusing on connectives
The study aims to investigate whether explicitation, a feature of translational language (translation universal), was observed in Korean-Chinese translation and in all semantic relations translation. The study defined the explicitation as cohesive connectives. In order to identify the frequency and type of connectives in Korean-into-Chinese translation and compare them with those in native Chinese texts, a comparable corpus was established with Korean-into-Chinese newspaper editorial translations (approximately 300,000 words) and non-translated Chinese newspaper editorials (approximately 310,000 words). In order to examine explicitation in the actual translation process as well, a parallel corpus was established with Korean newspaper editorials (approximately 180,000 syntactic words) and their Chinese translations. The quantitative analysis was performed to obtain answers to the three research questions that follow. The comparable corpus analysis was carried out to answer the first and second research questions while the parallel corpus analysis was done for the third one. The first research question was whether explicitation was observed in translation of all connectives. A hypothesis for this question was that frequency of all connectives would be higher in the translation corpus than in the non-translation corpus. Frequency of 99 connectives that appeared both in the translation corpus and non-translation corpus was compared to find out that 47 connectives of them did not present statistically significant difference in frequency. Besides, only 24 out of the 52 connectives with significant frequency difference appeared more frequently in the translation corpus while the rest 28 connectives were more frequent in the non-translation corpus. According to the result, the hypothesis above was rejected. The second research question was whether explicitation was observed in all semantic relations translation. A hypothesis for this was that frequency of all semantic relations would be higher in the translation corpus than in the non-translation corpus. The analysis demonstrated that parallel relations, subjunctive relations, causal relations and adversative relations appeared more frequently in the translation corpus. However, the other semantic relation connectives had higher frequency in the non-translation corpus or frequency difference between the two corpora was not observed. Therefore, the second hypothesis was rejected. The third research question was whether high-frequency connectives and high-frequency semantic relations were the result of explicitation in the actual translation process. A hypothesis for this was that explicitation frequency of the high-frequency connectives and high-frequency semantic relations from ST to TT in the translation process would be similar to the frequency difference of those connectives and semantic relations between the translation corpus and non-translation corpus. The study analyzed translation of the top five high-frequency connectives and translation of the high-frequency semantic relations (the adversative and subjunctive). As a result, all the frequencies of the connectives made explicit in the translation process were remarkably lower than the frequency difference between the translation corpus and non-translation corpus. Therefore, the third hypothesis was rejected. As the three hypotheses were rejected in the quantitative analysis, the result was found to contradict the argument that explicitation is the translation universal. This implied that highly frequent appearance of the connectives in the translation corpus of Korean-Chinese translation may not be attributed to explicitation but ST interference. Successively, the study also carried out in-depth analysis that compared the contexts of ST and TT and explained the motive that caused translational shift of the connectives and its effect. The translational shift of the connectives is largely classified into ‘addition’ and ‘substitution’, which again is classified into specification and generalization. The analysis showed that addition took four forms: 1) linguistic difference of SL (source language) and TL (target language), 2) explicitation of logical relations, 3) addition of new contents and 4) rewriting. Among the four additional forms, explicitation of logical relations accounted for the largest proportion at 62.9%, implying that it was the main factor that brought addition of connectives. Meanwhile, linguistic difference of SL and TL recorded 34.3% with addition of new contents at 2.4% and rewriting at 0.4%. As connectives in Chinese are additive, intended messages can be conveyed even when the additive connectives are omitted. When important arguments or points in the context of newspaper editorials were translated, connectives were added to clarify and emphasize logical relations. Substitution is defined as when a semantic relation in ST is translated into a different one in TT. Most substitutions happened between semantic relations that belonged to the same main category of semantic relation, and drastic changes of logical relations in ST rarely took place in the translation process. Specification of the substitution occurred when the parallel and additive relation in ST were substituted with the result relation in TT or temporal, parallel, subjunctive and causal relations in ST were substituted with the adversative relation in TT. In the meantime, generalization took place when concessive and adversative relations in ST were substituted with the subjunctive relation in TT. The study investigated explicitation in Korean-Chinese translation that has not been systemically studied. Explicitation that has been studied so far is identified on the basis of translational English ? mostly translated from closely related European languages. This study provided empirical evidences from “genetically” distinct language pairs- Korean and Chinese. Furthermore, the study, as one of the rare attempts to investigate explicitation depending on different semantic relations of the connectives, will help expand the researches on explicitation in translation. It is also expected to contribute to research methods since it applied the composite corpus consisting of the comparable corpus and parallel corpus to a Korean-Chinese translation study for the first time.
Ⅰ. 서론 11.1. 연구 배경 및 목적 11.2. 연구 문제 및 연구 방법 61.3. 논문의 구성 8Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 92.1. 기술론적 번역학(DTS) 92.2. 코퍼스를 활용한 번역 연구 132.3. 번역 언어의 특성 192.4. 명시화 242.4.1. 개념 정의 242.4.2. 명시화 가설과 번역 보편소 342.4.3. 명시화 가설에 대한 비판 372.4.4. 명시화 유형 402.4.5. 비대칭 가설 422.5. 명시화 선행연구 고찰 442.6. 접속기제 562.6.1. 접속기제와 명시화 572.6.2. 접속기제와 의미관계 602.6.3. 한국어 접속기제 622.6.4. 중국어 접속기제 64Ⅲ. 연구 방법 683.1. 연구설계 683.2. 분석방법 및 분석절차 733.2.1. 코퍼스 구축 733.2.2. 코퍼스 사전처리 작업 803.2.3. 코퍼스 분석 873.2.4. 번역유형 심층 분석 993.2.5. 분석 신뢰도 102Ⅳ. 코퍼스 분석 1044.1. 비교 코퍼스 분석 1044.1.1. 전체 접속기제 1044.1.2. 의미관계 별 접속기제 1094.2. 병렬 코퍼스 분석 1154.2.1. 고빈도 접속기제 1214.2.1.1. 如果 1214.2.1.2. 但是 1294.2.1.3. ?然 1374.2.1.4. ?使 1424.2.1.5. 因此 1454.2.2. 고빈도 의미관계 1554.2.2.1. 가정관계 1554.2.2.2. 역접관계 1604.3. 소결 168Ⅴ. 번역유형 심층 분석 1735.1. 추가 1735.1.1. SL과 TL 언어 차이 1755.1.2. 논리관계 명시화 1905.1.3. 새로운 내용 추가 2035.1.4. 다시쓰기 2085.2. 변경 2105.2.1. 구체화 2115.2.2. 일반화 2205.2.3. 기타 2245.3. 소결 238Ⅵ. 결론 2426.1. 연구결과 요약 2426.2. 연구 의의 2466.3. 연구 한계 및 향후 과제 248참고문헌 250영문초록 280
