Linguistic Distance

This article reports on research which seeks to compare and measure the similarities between phonetic transcriptions in the analysis of relationships between varieties of English. It addresses the question of whether these varieties have been converging, diverging, or maintaining equilibrium as a result of endogenous and exogenous phonetic and phonological changes. We argue that it is only possible to identify such patterns of change by the simultaneous comparison of a wide range of varieties of a language across a data set that has not been specifically selected to highlight those changes that are believed to be important. Our analysis suggests that although there has been an obvious reduction in regional variation with the loss of traditional dialects of English and Scots, there has not been any significant convergence (or divergence) of regional accents of English in recent decades, despite the rapid spread of a number of features such as TH-fronting.

Коряков Ю.Б. Проблема «язык или диалект» и попытка лексикостатистического подхода // Вопросы языкознания, 2017, № 6. С. 79–101.

Разграничение языков и диалектов — один из «вечных» вопросов лингвистики. В статье дается краткий обзор двух типов подходов к этой проблеме: социо-этно-политических и структурных. Далее предлагается методика разграничения разных языков и диалектов одного языка, основанная на проценте совпадений по 100-словному списку Сводеша. Предложенная методика рассматривается на большом количестве примеров.

Linguists have always seen the notion of “language” as inherently problematic, and the question of whether a particular form of speech should be classified as a separate language or a dialect of a language cannot be answered easily indeed. In this paper, criteria such as shared standard norm, common ethnic identity, and mutual intelligibility are shortly reviewed. Then another method of disentangling languages and dialects based on the number of shared cognates in the 100-word Swadesh list is proposed. The method is tested on various examples.

Purpose -The purpose of this study is to propose an alternative basis for calculating cultural distance scores using Schwartz's cultural values. Design/methodology/approach -Cultural distance scores were calculated for 23 countries, based on the two most common measures of cultural difference (four cultural dimensions and Schwartz's 1994 culture level values), following Kogut and Singh's formula. Correlation analysis was used to assess the congruency between these two bases of cultural distance. In addition, their relationship with international trade figures was assessed, to understand how well each framework predicts the amount of trade between countries. Findings -Inter-country distances between 23 countries suggest that the two bases of cultural distance were not congruent. While the correlation between both cultural distance measures and international trade suggested a negative relationship, as expected, only cultural distance based on Schwartz's values was significantly related to international trade ( p , 0.05). It would appear that, at least in a trade context, Schwartz's values may play a more significant role than do Hofstede's dimensions. Originality/value -To date, most cultural distance scores have been based on Hofstede's cultural dimensions. This paper provides the first analysis of cultural distance based on Schwartz's country level values. The paper shows that the two measures are not congruent and that, at least in the context of trade, cultural distance measures based on Schwartz's may be superior. Thus, researchers should carefully consider which cultural base is most appropriate for use in their study.

Culture has long been recognized as a possible reason why people in different countries make different decisions, but research into its impact in tourism contexts has been limited. This study addressed this gap by examining the influence of cultural distance on tourists' destination choices. Five cultural distance measures were examined. Of the five measures, perceived cultural distance and Clark and Pugh's index were found to be most strongly related to Australian tourists' intentions to visit a variety of holiday destinations. The perceived cultural distance measure appeared to be a better predictor and offers some advantages to researchers as it allows respondents to include relevant cultural information in tourism research. However, as Clark and Pugh's method provided similar information, cultural differences can be inferred when it is not possible to survey tourists directly. Crown

The calculation of aggregate linguistic distances can compensate for some of the drawbacks inherent to the isogloss bundling method used in traditional dialectology to identify dialect areas. Synchronic aggregate analysis can also point out differences with respect to a diachronically based classification of dialects. In this study the Levenshtein algorithm is applied for the first time to obtain an aggregate analysis of the linguistic distances among 88 diatopic varieties of Croatian spoken along the Eastern Adriatic coast and in the Italian province of Molise. We also measured lexical differences among these varieties, which are traditionally grouped into Čakavian, Štokavian, and transitional Čakavian-Štokavian varieties. The lexical and pronunciational distances are subsequently projected onto multidimensional cartographic representations. Both kinds of analyses confirmed that linguistic discontinuity is characteristic of the whole region, and that discontinuities are more pronounced in the northern Adriatic area than in the south. We also show that the geographic lines are in many cases the most decisive factor contributing to linguistic cohesion, and that the internal heterogeneity within Čakavian is often greater than the differences between Čakavian and Štokavian varieties. This holds both for pronunciation and lexicon.

In this article we present the most relevant new aspects from the COD2 project, which is based on an oral dialectal corpus of contemporary Catalan created as a continuation of the first COD compiled two decades before. In the first place, the new project intends to analyze the changes undergone by the Catalan language during this period. In second place, we no longer center the linguistic analysis on the traditional generativist techniques but on the tenets of Optimality Theory. And, finally, we use new dialectometric techniques based principally on probabilistic analytical procedures.

Au fil de nos diverses expériences universitaires et professionnelles, nous avons remarqué les différences fondamentales qui distinguent la traduction anglais-français de la traduction japonais-français. Au-delà du cas particulier de ces deux combinaisons linguistiques, nous nous sommes mis à nous interroger sur l’influence qu’exerce la distance entre les langues et les cultures sur la traduction de manière générale. Lorsque nous discutons de cette question avec professeurs et collègues, les réactions sont généralement aux antipodes : si certains affirment qu’il va de soi que la distance linguistique et culturelle joue un rôle en traduction, d’autres nient la pertinence même de la question.

Le présent article appartient à la discipline qu’on nomme généralement traductologie en français, translation studies en anglais, et 翻訳通訳学 (hon’yakutsūyakugaku) en japonais. Plus précisément, ce texte s’articule, au point de vue théorique, autour de l’idée de distance entre langues-cultures et s’appuie, au point de vue empirique, sur l’analyse comparative de la traduction des références culturelles dans les sous-titres japonais et anglais de deux films québécois francophones. En confrontant les manières dont sont traduites de part et d’autre les références culturelles, lesquelles nous considérons comme des témoins ponctuels de réalités linguistico-culturelles globales, nous cherchons à comprendre le rôle que joue la distance entre deux langues-cultures dans le processus traductif, selon l’ampleur de celle-ci. Le point de départ de notre recherche est l’hypothèse, présentée ici de manière schématique, selon laquelle la taille du défi de la traduction entre deux langues-cultures tend à augmenter proportionnellement à la distance qui les sépare. /// 本稿は、翻訳通訳学に属する研究で、理論的観点からは言語文化的距離という理念を中心に扱い、実証的観点からはフランス語で制作された2本のケベック映画における文化要素の日本語字幕と英語字幕の訳出の比較分析を行っている。つまり、全体的な言語文化的現実の具体的な表れとみなされる文化要素が日・英両言語でどのように訳されているかを比較することにより、言語文化的距離が翻訳過程に及ぼす影響を理解しようと努めている。

Si une importante proportion des textes traductologiques contiennent des références plus ou moins directes à la notion de « distance » entre langues-cultures, peu y sont expressément consacrés. Néanmoins, la plupart des traductologues qui ont étudié la question de front reconnaissent que la « distance interlinguistique » joue bel et bien un rôle et plusieurs soutiennent même que son amplitude constitue un indicateur de la grandeur des défis que posera la traduction.

Cette présentation s’inscrit dans le cadre de nos recherches doctorales portant sur l’influence du facteur de la « distance » entre langues-cultures sur la traduction, au regard de la triade japonais-anglais-français. Elle s’articulera principalement autour de la notion de « distance interlinguistique » au point de vue du processus traductif et offrira un tour d’horizon de la question fondé essentiellement sur la littérature.

D’abord, nous présenterons la notion de « distance interlinguistique » dans ses grandes lignes : définitions, concepts connexes, types, méthodes de mesure et champs d’application.

Nous examinerons ensuite la position de cinq traductologues sur la question de la « distance » en traduction : d’abord, entre langues « éloignées », Donald Philippi (1989) et Judy Wakabayashi (1991) pour la traduction japonais-anglais, Robin Setton (1993) pour l’interprétation chinois-anglais et Götz Wienold (2004) pour la traduction japonais-allemand, puis, entre langues « proches », Valentín García Yebra (2004) pour la traduction portugais-espagnol. Nous proposerons ensuite une synthèse de leurs affirmations à partir desquelles nous esquisserons certaines conclusions exploratoires.

Fait intéressant, trois de ces cinq auteurs critiquent à divers degrés l’École de Paris et sa théorie interprétative. En effet, pour les tenants de cette approche, les langues ne représentent pas un véritable facteur dans le processus traductif. Nous présenterons donc d’abord sommairement la théorie interprétative, puis nous exposerons les opinions de deux de ses disciples qui l’appliquent à des langues asiatiques, Jung Wha Choi (1990) pour le coréen et He Ping Zhao (1990) pour le chinois.

Après avoir résumé les points de vue en opposition, nous terminerons notre communication par un bref retour aux questions plus larges suscitées par nos recherches doctorales en plaçant finalement l’aspect culturel et le traducteur au cœur de la question.

While there is common agreement that “orality” has to be considered a crucial factor in analyzing historical data, it is still an open question how this should be done in a theoretically as well as empirically satisfying manner. In this respect, the paper aims at a comparison of different empirical and theoretical approaches to “ancient orality” in order to determine the factors which have so far prevented an alignment of different perspectives: Taking particular “oral” phenomena as a point of reference, the main thesis of the paper claims that the traditional binary distinction “oral” vs. “written” is neither an absolute concept nor does it adequately account for the complex historical (and present-day) conditions. Instead, it is shown by means of a detailed empirical analysis of different “oral” phenomena that (at least) three different dimensions on two different levels of “orality” have to be taken into account. This leads to a three-dimensional model of “orality” which is discussed concerning its implications with regard to a theory of “ancient orality” and present spoken language.

Although the conceptual toolbox of translation studies (TS) has grown more and more inclusive in recent decades and despite the great variety of spatial metaphors that have been used for translation through the ages, explicit discussions of the seemingly obvious idea of distance (linguistic, cultural, temporal, etc.) are scarce in the TS literature. Why, then, should the concept now be given any thought? When I started translating from both English and Japanese into French, I soon noticed the differences between the two practices. In trying to generalize the problem beyond the case of these three languages, I quickly became interested in the concept of distance, especially linguistic and cultural, and in the effects it has on translation. In short, is distance a factor that influences translating and thus translations? As naïve as the question may seem, it is genuinely thorny as some will dismiss it right away for lack of relevance, while others will answer without hesitation in the affirmative, or in the negative. Moreover, in reading TS texts, I have noticed that although distance is quite often evoked and even invoked, paradoxically, it is rarely defined, objectified or problematized, it does not have the status of “concept” in the discipline, and very few studies overtly make use of it. Yet, I believe it is precisely the countless differences between languages and cultures—which I think of as a whole and refer to as distance—that make translation not only necessary but, above all, possible. However, while I am confident that translation is always achievable no matter the breadth of the gap to be bridged, this does not mean that the processes and the products will be “equivalent.” On a broader level, distance manifests itself in a wealth of relationships found at the very heart of translation: between languages and cultures, of course, but also between regions, periods, societies, audiences, texts, people, etc. I thus think the concept can be put to work and operationalized in various ways to better understand or explain a wide array of areas and phenomena germane to translation (language learning and teaching, machine translation, global translation flows, etc.), well beyond the “narrow” act of translating. I therefore aim to argue not only that the concept of distance (especially between languages and cultures) is relevant to translation (studies), but also that its thorough consideration is long overdue. [...]

The article deals with the genealogical, typological, and lexicostatistical distances be¬tween Gagauz and Karaim. The aim is to present linguistic data relevant for measuring linguistic distances. The article thus complements the theoretical approach outlined by Lars Johanson (2018) and published in this issue of Turkic Languages.