翻译等价真的等价吗?翻译启动中具体效应的证据

IF 1.3 2区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Adel Chaouch-Orozco, Jorge González Alonso, J. Duñabeitia, J. Rothman
{"title":"翻译等价真的等价吗?翻译启动中具体效应的证据","authors":"Adel Chaouch-Orozco, Jorge González Alonso, J. Duñabeitia, J. Rothman","doi":"10.1177/13670069221146641","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Translation equivalents intuitively seem to overlap in meaning. Moreover, the models of the bilingual lexicon often represent the meaning shared between two translations as a holistic node in the semantic network. However, research on semantic representation and processing questions this holistic approach. For instance, abstract words are assumed to be more language-dependent, while concrete words’ meanings are seen as more consistent cross-linguistically. The non-cognate translation priming paradigm offers an ideal methodological setting to study semantic overlap (proxied by concreteness) between translations. Priming effects between non-cognate translation equivalents are assumed to emerge due to spreading activation at the semantic level. Hence, a larger semantic overlap between translation prime-target pairs should lead to larger priming effects. Nevertheless, the evidence from previous translation priming studies investigating concreteness displays a blurry picture, potentially reflecting a shared limitation: their relatively small sample sizes. We overcame this problem by analysing the largest translation priming dataset to date. Two hundred Spanish–English highly proficient bilinguals were tested in a bidirectional translation priming experiment employing 314 non-cognate translation equivalents differing in concreteness. We analysed response times and error rates employing conservative (generalized) linear mixed-effects models. The results showed that concrete translation pairs elicited larger priming effects than abstract ones, evidencing differences in semantic representation between concrete and abstract words. Importantly, the influence of concreteness appeared only in the forward translation direction, suggesting language experience-related differences in meaning representation. The present study analysed the largest dataset in the translation priming literature to date, employing a conservative statistical approach to shed light on the effects of concreteness on translation priming. Our study spotlights the complexity and non-holistic nature of the bilingual semantic representation of concrete and abstract words. The present findings call for more research to help the current models of the bilingual lexicon implement more nuanced semantic representations.","PeriodicalId":47574,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Bilingualism","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are translation equivalents really equivalent? Evidence from concreteness effects in translation priming\",\"authors\":\"Adel Chaouch-Orozco, Jorge González Alonso, J. Duñabeitia, J. Rothman\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13670069221146641\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Translation equivalents intuitively seem to overlap in meaning. Moreover, the models of the bilingual lexicon often represent the meaning shared between two translations as a holistic node in the semantic network. However, research on semantic representation and processing questions this holistic approach. For instance, abstract words are assumed to be more language-dependent, while concrete words’ meanings are seen as more consistent cross-linguistically. The non-cognate translation priming paradigm offers an ideal methodological setting to study semantic overlap (proxied by concreteness) between translations. Priming effects between non-cognate translation equivalents are assumed to emerge due to spreading activation at the semantic level. Hence, a larger semantic overlap between translation prime-target pairs should lead to larger priming effects. Nevertheless, the evidence from previous translation priming studies investigating concreteness displays a blurry picture, potentially reflecting a shared limitation: their relatively small sample sizes. We overcame this problem by analysing the largest translation priming dataset to date. Two hundred Spanish–English highly proficient bilinguals were tested in a bidirectional translation priming experiment employing 314 non-cognate translation equivalents differing in concreteness. We analysed response times and error rates employing conservative (generalized) linear mixed-effects models. The results showed that concrete translation pairs elicited larger priming effects than abstract ones, evidencing differences in semantic representation between concrete and abstract words. Importantly, the influence of concreteness appeared only in the forward translation direction, suggesting language experience-related differences in meaning representation. The present study analysed the largest dataset in the translation priming literature to date, employing a conservative statistical approach to shed light on the effects of concreteness on translation priming. Our study spotlights the complexity and non-holistic nature of the bilingual semantic representation of concrete and abstract words. The present findings call for more research to help the current models of the bilingual lexicon implement more nuanced semantic representations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47574,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Bilingualism\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Bilingualism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069221146641\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Bilingualism","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069221146641","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

翻译对等物直观上似乎在意义上重叠。此外,双语词典模型往往将两种译文之间共享的意义作为语义网络中的一个整体节点来表示。然而,语义表征和处理的研究对这种整体方法提出了质疑。例如,抽象词被认为更依赖于语言,而具体词的含义被认为是跨语言一致的。非同源翻译启动范式为研究翻译间的语义重叠(以具体性为代表)提供了一个理想的方法论背景。非同源翻译对等物之间的启动效应被认为是由于语义层面的扩散激活而产生的。因此,翻译启动-目标对之间的语义重叠越大,启动效应也就越大。然而,先前的翻译启动研究的证据显示了一个模糊的画面,潜在地反映了一个共同的局限性:他们的样本量相对较小。我们通过分析迄今为止最大的翻译启动数据集克服了这个问题。对200名西班牙语-英语熟练双语者进行了双向翻译启动实验,采用了314个不同具体程度的非同源翻译对等物。我们采用保守(广义)线性混合效应模型分析了响应时间和错误率。结果表明,具体翻译对比抽象翻译对产生更大的启动效应,说明具体词和抽象词在语义表征上存在差异。重要的是,具体性的影响只出现在正向翻译方向,这表明语言经验在意义表征方面存在差异。本研究分析了迄今为止翻译启动文献中最大的数据集,采用保守的统计方法来阐明具体性对翻译启动的影响。我们的研究突出了具体和抽象词汇的双语语义表征的复杂性和非整体性。目前的研究结果需要更多的研究来帮助当前的双语词汇模型实现更细致的语义表示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Are translation equivalents really equivalent? Evidence from concreteness effects in translation priming
Translation equivalents intuitively seem to overlap in meaning. Moreover, the models of the bilingual lexicon often represent the meaning shared between two translations as a holistic node in the semantic network. However, research on semantic representation and processing questions this holistic approach. For instance, abstract words are assumed to be more language-dependent, while concrete words’ meanings are seen as more consistent cross-linguistically. The non-cognate translation priming paradigm offers an ideal methodological setting to study semantic overlap (proxied by concreteness) between translations. Priming effects between non-cognate translation equivalents are assumed to emerge due to spreading activation at the semantic level. Hence, a larger semantic overlap between translation prime-target pairs should lead to larger priming effects. Nevertheless, the evidence from previous translation priming studies investigating concreteness displays a blurry picture, potentially reflecting a shared limitation: their relatively small sample sizes. We overcame this problem by analysing the largest translation priming dataset to date. Two hundred Spanish–English highly proficient bilinguals were tested in a bidirectional translation priming experiment employing 314 non-cognate translation equivalents differing in concreteness. We analysed response times and error rates employing conservative (generalized) linear mixed-effects models. The results showed that concrete translation pairs elicited larger priming effects than abstract ones, evidencing differences in semantic representation between concrete and abstract words. Importantly, the influence of concreteness appeared only in the forward translation direction, suggesting language experience-related differences in meaning representation. The present study analysed the largest dataset in the translation priming literature to date, employing a conservative statistical approach to shed light on the effects of concreteness on translation priming. Our study spotlights the complexity and non-holistic nature of the bilingual semantic representation of concrete and abstract words. The present findings call for more research to help the current models of the bilingual lexicon implement more nuanced semantic representations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
76
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Bilingualism is an international forum for the dissemination of original research on the linguistic, psychological, neurological, and social issues which emerge from language contact. While stressing interdisciplinary links, the focus of the Journal is on the language behavior of the bi- and multilingual individual.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信