The Comparable Corpus-Based Chinese-English Translation - A Case Study of City Introduction
By Guangsa Jin,
Peking University, China
Get the List of 5,400+ Translation Agencies Now! No Recurring Membership Fees!
Abstract
Since
only a limited pool of qualified native English-speaking
translators can do Chinese-English translation, it is inevitable
for native Chinese-speaking translators to translate out
of their native language. Influenced by their mother tongue,
Chinese translators often use some awkward expressions,
which do not exist in English, in the translated texts.
This paper aims to explore how a comparable corpus can be
applied in Chinese-English translation to assist native
Chinese-speaking translators to make their translated texts
sound natural to native English speakers. To illustrate
the point, a comparable corpus on the subject of city introduction
is constructed. With the help of comparable corpus analysis
tools, sentence length, lexical density, and other statistics
which can reflect the stylistic features of the translated
texts are derived. It is argued that a comparable corpus
which can provide examples of natural expressions in the
target language plays an irreplaceable role in terminology
extraction, awkward collocation spotting and it is also
can pick up some small errors which are often neglected
by non-native English-speaking translators such as the usage
of articles.
Introduction
In terms of the prerequisites of translators, the
ideal candidates would be the native speakers of the target
language. This guideline is followed by many translation
agencies for International institutes. It is also clearly
stated in the Occupational Outlook Handbook of the U.S.
Department of Labor that the nature of translation is for
the translators to put their secondary, or passive language
into their native, or active language. However, this is
not the case in Chinese-English translation. According to
Xu Meijiang (2004), a senior translator in China's Central
Translation Bureau, though some qualified native English-speaking
translators are involved in C-E translating, editing or
proofreading; large volumes of C-E translations are done
by native Chinese-speaking translators alone. The present
situation will not be changed in the near future for two
reasons: first, only a limited pool of qualified native
English-speaking translators are available; second, the
fee charged by native English-speaking translators is much
higher than those of their Chinese counterparts. The statistics
from Beijing Evening News (2007) state that 60% of the translation
market demand cannot be met, and China is in desperate need
for qualified C-E translators. The present problems would
be how to improve the quality of the C-E translation done
by native Chinese-speaking translators. Corpora would be
a helpful tool to arm them.
The development of computer technology and Internet make
the comparable corpus-based approach accessible. In the
corpus-based approach, two subcorpora are to be constructed:
Subcorpus A—C-E translation done by Chinese translators;
Subcorpus B—English texts on the same subject written by
native English speakers.
|
Since
equivalents can be easily extracted from aligned parallel
corpora, they are extensively used in translation
practice.
|
First, since computers are widely used in translators' everyday
work, electronic translation texts are available, which enables
the construction of Subcorpus A. Second, the Internet provides
a huge archive of texts written by native English speakers,
storing the most recently updated language and information
on various subjects and making the construction of Subcorpus
B easier than ever before. Third, the advancement of software
engineering offers tools to process the corpus. Customizable
corpus analysis software is produced to meet different research
and study needs. Wordsmith (Scott 1996), MonoConc (Barlow
1999) and AntConc (Laurence Anthony 2007) are the most common
corpus analysis software packages and are widely used in the
fields of literature, pedagogy, linguistics and translation
studies. Machine-readable texts and computer programs make
quantitative language study possible, offering new approaches
to improve the quality of translation.
This paper aims to examine how comparable corpora can be
used to enhance the quality of the Chinese-English translations
done by non-native English-speaking translators. To illustrate
the point, comparable corpora comprising original English
texts and translated texts into English on the subject of
City Introduction are constructed and the question of how
they can help translators who are translating out of their
native language to use idiomatic expressions is examined.
1 Corpus-based Translation Study: A Review
The 20th century saw a dramatic change in translation studies—a
transformation from traditional prescriptive study into
descriptive study, which directly promotes the development
of corpus-based translation studies. Scholars and translation
education professionals, who used to conduct translation
studies or provide translation trainings on an intuitive
basis, started to do empirical research, relying on both
original and translated texts. Therefore, various kinds
of translational corpora are constructed to meet different
needs in descriptive and practical translation studies.
1.1 Current Research
1.1.1 Corpus-based Descriptive Translation Study
It is generally acknowledged that Mona Baker is a pioneer
in corpus-based translation studies, since she was the first
person to conceive the idea of translational corpus construction
and actually set up one—the Translational English Corpus
(TEC). TEC, a project funded by the British Academy, was
started in 1996 and opened to the public on line in 1999.
Translated from European languages such as French, German
and Spanish and non-European languages such as Chinese and
Thai, the texts in the corpus are taken directly from publications.
Mona Baker and other faculty members in the University of
Manchester Institute of Science & Technology (UMIST)
have done translation studies on the basis of TEC. Basically,
TEC-based translation studies fall into three categories:
features of translationese; studies on translator's style;
social and cultural influence on translation.
Compared with original texts, translationese, the language
of translated texts has its own special features. Thus comparable
studies have been done to reveal the differences. Baker
(1996) observed that the translated version usually had
the features of explication, simplification, normalization
and leveling out. By making a comparison between TEC and
BNC on the usage of "that" which precedes an objective
clause, Olohan and Baker (2000) found that the ratio of
"that" was much higher than that in BNC, which
further demonstrated the feature of explication. Besides
simplification, explication and normalization, Sara Laviosa
(1998) added three more features—avoidance of repetitions
present in the source text, discourse transfer and law of
interference, and distinctive distribution of target-language
items.
TEC was used to study the different styles of translators.
By making a comparison between the type-token ratio, sentence
length and narrative structure of the translation of Peter
Bush and Peter Clark, two British translators, Baker (2000)
came to the conclusion that Clark had a more direct style
than Bush.
Cultural differences between nations are revealed through
comparisons between TEC and texts originally written in
English. For example, Laviosa (2002) showed the differences
between cultural messages by making a comparison between
the news subcorpora of the English Comparable Corpus (ECC),
a corpus constructed by herself, which included 396 articles
from the Guardian and Europe Journal and the news subcorpora
in TEC which included news translated from German, Slavic,
Italian, etc.
Descriptive translation study lays the foundation for practical
translation studies. The universal of translation revealed
in corpus-based descriptive translation studies suggests
ways translators can make their translation sound more natural
to the target language readers. Besides, the methodologies
used in descriptive translation study are very inspiring
to those involved in translation practice and in other practical
translation studies.
1.1.2 Corpus-based Practical Translation Study
Whereas a wide array of different kinds of corpora has
been applied in descriptive translation studies, exploration
has been made to adapt corpora to practical translation
studies. Federico Zanettin raised the idea of using corpora
in the training of translators in 1998 and further illustrated
the point by presenting an experiment in which the Olympics
corpus was used by a group of trainee translators to translate
an Italian sports article into English. Since then, scholars
began to pay attention to the role corpora could play in
translation education and new approaches were developed.
Jennifer Pearson (2000) noted that parallel corpora were
very useful in the translator training environment because
they could show the trainees "how professional translators
have overcome specific translation problems." Natalie
Kübler (2000) illustrated how to use specialized and general
corpora and corpus query tools to look for term candidates
and their phraseology. Krista Varantola (2000) introduced
a new type of corpus—disposable corpora which were used
as performance-enhancing tools in the training of prospective
professional translators and she also demonstrated how to
apply Wordsmith Tools in corpus analysis.
1.2 Problems in Corpus-based C-E Translation Study
Since equivalents can be easily extracted from aligned
parallel corpora, they are extensively used in translation
practice. The significant role parallel corpora play in
terminology extraction is not in dispute here. However,
when focusing on Chinese-English translation study, relying
solely on parallel corpora represents a problem.
First of all, high-quality C-E translation are comparatively
rare since most C-E translations are done by native Chinese
translators, who live in a Chinese-speaking environment
and have little peer support from native English speakers.
One can easily spot "unconventional" and "creative"
expressions in these translations which, in most cases,
confuse native English readers. These translations can hardly
meet the need of communication between source language writers
and target language readers. Therefore, the quality of a
parallel corpus containing poor translations as raw materials
is in doubt.
Secondly, it is difficult to align a parallel corpus of
high-quality C-E translation since English is a language
of hypotaxis while Chinese is a language of parataxis. To
make the translation sound natural to native English readers,
translators need to bring out the implied logic in Chinese
texts by using discourse markers or other means. Absolute
equivalence in syntactic structures does not exist. Therefore,
a huge amount of aligning work will be involved in parallel
corpus compiling since automatic construction is difficult
to carry out.
Therefore, a comparable corpus, which provides samples
of language as they are used naturally by native English
speakers, is extremely useful for translators who translate
out of their mother tongue. A comparable corpus has one
collection of texts written by native speakers of the target
language on the same topic of the translated texts (city
introduction is the topic in this paper). Translators can
imitate the sentence pattern and idiomatic expressions used
by native speakers.
2 Methodology
This paper aims to illustrate the value a monolingual comparable
corpus has in Chinese-English translation practice and to
demonstrate how a comparable corpus can be used in C-E translation
practice to enhance the quality of the translation done
by a non-native English speaker. Therefore, it is a practical
translation study.
2.1 Comparable Corpus
In the experiment, a comparable corpus which comprises
two English subcorpora—a translated text collection and
an original text collection, is constructed. The comparable
corpus is the most important translation corpus for translators
who translate out of their mother tongue. As already mentioned
it is indispensable for native Chinese translators to be
involved in C-E translation, since the ultimate goal in
their translation practice should be making the translated
texts understandable and sound natural to native target-language
readers. The aim is not easy to be achieved in C-E translation
without the participation of native English speakers. Therefore,
the comparable corpus, which serves as an English consultant,
plays an irreplaceable role in C-E translation practice.
2.2 Corpus Analysis Tools
Different from paper texts, electronic corpora can be processed
by computer automatically. In this study, three freely available
programs are used in corpus analysis, terminology extraction
and corpus construction, namely, A Corpus Worker's Toolkit
(ACWT), AntConc and GoTagger.
3 A Case Study of City Introduction: Procedure
3.1 Corpus Construction
As the largest corpus, the Internet provides an almost
unlimited number of electronic articles updated every minute.
The vast pool of information serves well as a translation
corpus resource. The comparable corpus used in the experiment
is a disposable corpus which has two subcorpora on the same
subject—City Introduction.
3.1.1 Subcorpus A—translated texts done by native
Chinese speakers
Two steps are involved in Subcorpus A's construction—data
collecting and compilation.
In the process of data collecting, it was found that C-E
translated articles on city introduction can be obtained
from several kinds of website, including tourism websites,
websites to invite investment and local government websites.
Since tourism websites, in most cases, are commercial websites,
the city introduction unavoidably has several descriptive
paragraphs and functions as an advertisement. Therefore,
most articles compiled in the corpus are from government-run
websites and mainly provide factual information. Therefore,
the search strategies involved in the data collecting process
are quite simple—downloading the city introduction pages
from China's local government websites (usually provincial
capital cities' websites).
However, web pages cannot be processed by corpus analysis
software directly. The articles in html format need to be
converted into txt format. In this step, "A Corpus
Worker's Toolkit" (ACWT) is used to do the conversion.
First, the web page is opened in the NoteTab. Then HTML<—>Text
Conversion tool is run to get the article in txt form. After
converting all texts into txt form, the merge file tool
is applied to obtain a single file. ACWT saves the tedious
and mechanical job of corpus compilation dramatically.
3.1.2 Subcorpus B—original texts written by native
English speakers
Since the articles in Subcorpus A are factual information
on cities, an English on-line electronic encyclopedia is
chosen as the source for Subcorpus B. Compared with articles
in Wikipedia, Encyclopedia Britannica and other on-line
English encyclopedia texts, in Encarta, a digital multimedia
encyclopedia published by Microsoft Corporation, are more
relevant to the texts in Subcorpus A. Therefore, five metropolitan
introductions are selected. The same compilation strategy
as in Subcorpus A construction is applied here. The detailed
quantitative characteristics of the corpus are demonstrated
in Table 1
| |
Number of Articles |
Tokens |
Types |
|
Subcorpus A |
22 |
28947 |
4653 |
|
Subcorpus B |
5 |
28816 |
4949 |
Table 1 Corpus Characteristics
As Table 1 shows, the two subcorpora are comparable as
their sizes are quite similar. It has been observed that
some data have meaning only when the tokens are similar,
such as the type/token ratio which is the ratio of different
words to total words. Since the number of total English
words is fixed, tokens can be infinitely great, which is
not true for types (Yang Huizhong, 2002).
3.2 Data Processing
The corpus analysis tools introduced above are applied
for exploring the comparable corpus to get information on
stylistic features and to do terminology extraction as well
as to check whether some expressions in the translated texts
sound natural to target-language readers. The main processing
steps are shown as below.
3.2.1 Stylistic Features
In calculating the lexical density (LD), the formula is
derived from the ACWT—Lexical Density = (Number of different
words / Total number of words) x 100. To measure two numbers
here, the word counter tool in Microsoft Word and the wordlist
tool in AntConc are applied. Then the data are put back
to the formula to get the LD of the two subcorpora.
In measuring sentence length, the formula is Sentence Length
= token / (number of full stops + number of exclamatory
marks + number of interrogation marks). ACWT is applied
in counting the punctuation mentioned above.
| |
Full Stop |
Exclamatory Marks |
Interrogation Marks |
Sentence Length |
Lexical Density |
|
Subcorpus A |
2075 |
0 |
8 |
13.9 |
16.1% |
|
Subcorpus B |
1466 |
1 |
2 |
19.6 |
17.2% |
Table 2 Data on Stylistic Features
3.2.2 Terminology Extraction & Concordance
Besides revealing the stylistic features of the translation,
comparable corpora can be used in terminology extraction
and to demonstrate the context in which the terms occur
in the native speakers' writing. AntConc is the corpus query
software used in this process. Since the number of texts
compiled in the disposable corpus is limited, the British
National Corpus (BNC) is used as a supplement to Subcorpus
B for terminology extraction. Parallel corpora and on-line
dictionaries play a complementary role in actual C-E translation
practice, in which the equivalence of the Chinese terms
are looked for in a parallel corpus or an on-line dictionary.
Usually, several candidate terms are found. Then, it is
the comparable corpus that tells which candidate term is
the natural expression in the target language and suitable
to be used as well as how to combine it with other words
in the context. The following example is to illustrate the
idea.
The term "公共交通" (gōng gņng jiāo tōng, literally
public transport) often occurs in city introductions. Looking
for the Chinese in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure
(CNKI) on-line dictionary, a dictionary based on parallel
corpora, one may get three candidate terms, namely, public
transportation, public traffic and public transport. Using
the concordance tool in AntConc to query the three terms
in the comparable corpus, one may only find "public
traffic" has appeared in Subcorpus A, while "public
transport" and "public transportation" have
occurred in Subcorpus B. The occurrences of the two terms
resembled, whereas "public transport" has 929
occurrences, public transportation 6 occurrences and no
solutions found for "public traffic" when queried
in the BNC. The ratio of occurrences of "public transport"
to "public transportation" would have been more
favorable to the latter if a U.S. corpus had been consulted.
Obviously, public traffic is an unnatural expression in
English.
3.2.3 Part of Speech Tagging
GoTagger07 is the tool used in part of speech tagging (POS
tagging). The statistics in Table 3 is derived from the
tagged texts.
| |
Subcorpus A |
Subcorpus B |
|
Determiner |
2729 |
3540 |
|
Coordinating Conjunction |
1341 |
1181 |
|
Adjective |
3500 |
3153 |
|
Noun (exclude proper noun) |
6372 |
5148 |
|
Personal Pronoun |
136 |
223 |
|
Adverb |
481 |
707 |
|
Verb, base form |
216 |
317 |
|
Verb, past tense |
844 |
1082 |
|
Verb, non-3rd ps. sing. |
299 |
274 |
|
Verb, 3rd ps. sing. Present |
572 |
562 |
|
Verb |
1931 |
2235 |
|
Verb, gerund/present participle |
586 |
451 |
|
Verb, past participle |
821 |
777 |
|
wh-determiner |
98 |
138 |
|
wh-pronoun |
18 |
53 |
|
Possessive wh-pronoun |
7 |
5 |
|
wh-adverb |
19 |
66 |
Table 3 Data on Parts of Speech
4 A Case Study of City Introduction: Discussion
4.1 Style of the Translated Texts
Translated texts have such a distinguished language style
from the written language that a term—translationese—was
coined to describe it. In this study, some special features
of the translated texts have been spotted. Compared with
the city introductions originally written in English in
Subcorpus B, the translated city introduction tends to generate
shorter sentences with simpler sentence patterns, fewer
different words, more nouns, and fewer verbs.
First of all, translators form shorter sentences and are
more likely to use simple and compound sentences than target
language writers. As Table 2 shows, the average sentence
length in Subcorpus A is 5.7 words shorter than that in
Subcorpus B. Moreover, there's a considerable difference
in the sentence patterns between the two subcorpora. As
Table 2 shows, Subcorpus A has eight interrogative sentences,
while Subcorpus B has two interrogative sentences and one
exclamatory sentence. Therefore, most wh- words are used
as subordinate clause links. As the statistics in Table
3 shows, the number of wh- words in Subcorpus B almost doubles
compared to Subcorpus A. Thus we can conclude that more
complex sentences are used in texts originally written by
native English speakers than in translations done by native
Chinese speakers.
Secondly, compared with texts in Subcorpus B, less word
variety is noted in the translated texts. However, no striking
difference is spotted. As Table 2 demonstrates, the lexical
density in Subcorpus A is only 1.1% lower than that in Subcorpus
B.
Thirdly, the translated texts have more nouns and fewer
verbs than the texts originally written in English. It is
observed from Table 3 that nouns (excluding proper nouns)
take up 22.0% of all words in Subcorpus A and 17.9% in Subcorpus
B while predicate verbs account for 6.7% in Subcorpus A
and 7.8% in Subcorpus B. The words used in Subcorpus A are
4.1% higher in nouns and 1.1% lower in verbs.
As the three unique stylistic features of the translated
texts mentioned above showed, the sentence pattern and word
variety can be improved to make the translation sound more
natural to the target-language readers.
4.2 Comparable Corpus's Role in Making Translation
Sound Natural
Native English speakers are the intended readers of the
English translation. Therefore, the basic quality that a
good piece of translation should have is that the language
should sound natural to the target-language readers. Though
an easy criterion for translators who translate into their
mother tongue, it is quite a challenge for translators who
translate out of their native language. In this sense, a
comparable corpus, which provides examples of native English
speakers' expressions, can assist native Chinese translators
to use idiomatic expressions by providing the context in
which terms occur in native speakers' writings, spotting
awkward collocations and highlighting some small errors
which are often overlooked by non-native speakers, such
as the use of articles.
First of all, to produce a good piece of translation with
accurate use of terminology, a corpus is an indispensable
tool because it can display the context where these terms
occur in native speakers' writing. Compared with a traditional
paper dictionary, a comparable corpus is more efficient
in terminology extraction. Looking up a heavy and thick
paper dictionary is quite time-consuming. Moreover, the
word entries in the paper dictionary are fixed. Since vast
amount of new words are coined every day, the fixed paper
dictionary can never catch up with the development of society
and technology. The shortcomings of paper dictionaries are
overcome by the on-line dictionaries. An Internet-based
dictionary (such as the yodao dictionary) can be updated
every day. However, almost all the examples provided by
these on-line dictionaries are extracted from C-E translations
which, in most cases, were done by native Chinese translators.
Besides, since the example sentences are queried from the
Internet without careful selection, the quality cannot be
guaranteed. In contrast, the illustrative sentences extracted
from the comparable corpus based on well-selected texts
written by native target language speakers are more reliable
and sound more natural.
Secondly, together with corpus analysis tools, comparable
corpora can be applied in spotting awkward collocations
in the translated texts. In addition to choosing the suitable
words, combining them is a complicated problem. Awkward
collocations are the commonly occurring error that influences
the understanding of the target language reader. In finding
these unnatural expressions, a concordancer which is contained
in most corpus analysis software would be a very effective
tool. One may simply type in the phrase that he is not quite
sure about and query in both subcorpora. If the collocation
has occurred in a similar context, then it can be used.
If not, the core of the phrase is to be typed in and the
corpus based on texts written by native speaker is queried
to derive a natural expression. For example, "自然条件"
(zì rán tiáo jiàn, literally natural resources) was translated
into "natural condition (s)" in three translated
texts (Suzhou, Foshan and Shaoguan city introduction). However,
no hit was returned in Subcorpus B. Then the phrase was
typed into the BNC query resulting in ten hits. But, taking
a close look into the sentences, we found that "natural
condition" means the condition which is not made or
controlled by human beings.
Thirdly, the quantitative comparison between the translated
texts and texts written by native English speakers can reveal
some subtle errors which impair the quality of the translation,
but are often overlooked by non-native English speakers.
For example, articles (a, an, the) will not influence the
meaning enormously, whereas their absence can make the text
sound strange. Since articles do not exist in Chinese, they
are often forgotten by native Chinese translators. As Table
4 shows, the ratio of articles taking up in Subcorpus A
is 2.9% lower than that in Subcorpus B. And the number of
"the" in the translated texts is considerably
lower than that in the texts written by native English speakers.
That slight difference would considerably improve the translation.
| |
the |
a |
an |
article |
ratio |
|
Subcorpus A |
1685 |
296 |
127 |
2108 |
7.3% |
|
Subcorpus B |
2447 |
427 |
74 |
2948 |
10.2% |
Table 4 Articles
Conclusion
This study conducted an experiment to explore ways to use
comparable corpora in translation studies with the aim of
assisting translators who translate from their native language
in order to enhance the quality of the translated texts.
By carrying out a quantitative analysis, we acquired data
which indicate the special stylistic features of the translated
texts written by non-English-speaking translators in Subcorpus
B compared with the texts written by native English speakers.
Translators can make improvements of the different stylistic
features. Furthermore, this paper argues that the comparable
corpus is an indispensable tool in terminology extraction
by showing how to use the corpus in the process. Besides,
this paper explores the ways to apply a comparable corpus
in making the translation sound natural.
As this paper has proved, comparable corpora play a significant
role in translation study and practice. However, they also
have some limitations. First, one may not find comparable
texts in the target language. For example, it is difficult
to find comparable material for fictional works usually
containing many cultural elements which are unique to a
nation. Surely, one cannot find an English novel which is
comparable to the Chinese novel Dream of the Red Chamber
(《红楼梦》). Therefore, the comparable corpus is mainly useful
in translating universal topics. Second, comparable corpora
are not very helpful in translating materials in which creative
expressions are required, since they only allow translators
to use expressions that already exist. However, for native
Chinese translators, parroting English speakers' words is
not a bad idea because it at least makes the translated
texts readable and understandable to the target language
reader.
Although comparable corpora have some shortcomings, their
potential in translation studies is not to be underestimated.
In addition to studies on word level and syntactic level,
further studies can be carried out on the application of
comparable corpora on discourse-level translation studies.
Cohesive devises such as discourse markers, theme and rheme
distribution can be studied quantitatively. Furthermore,
strategies in constructing comparable corpora using the
Internet as its source can be developed.
References
- Baker, M. (1996). Corpus-based translation studies:
the challenges that lie ahead. In H. Somers (ed.). Terminology,
LSP and Translation: Studies in Language Engineering,
in Honour of Juan C. Sager. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
- Baker, M. (2000). Towards a Methodology for Investigating
the Style of a Literary Translator. Target 12,
241-266.
- Laviosa, S. (1998). Universals of Translation. In Mona
Baker (ed.). Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation
Studies. London: Routledge.
- Laviosa, S. (2002). Corpus-based Translation Studies:
Theory, Findings, Applications. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
- Olohan, M. & Baker, M. (2000). Reporting "that"
in translated English: Evidence of or subliminal processes
of explicitation? Across Languages and Cultures,
1(2), 141-158.
- Kübler, N. (2000). Corpora and LSP Translation.
In Federico Zanettin, Silvia Bernardini, Dominic Stewart
(eds.). Corpora in Translator Education. Beijing:
Foreign language Teaching and Research Press.
- Pearson, J. (2000). Using Parallel Texts in the Translator
Training Environment. In Federico Zanettin, Silvia Bernardini,
Dominic Stewart (eds.). Corpora in Translator Education.
Beijing: Foreign language Teaching and Research Press.
- Varantola, K. (2000). Translators and Disposable Corpora.
In Federico Zanettin, Silvia Bernardini, Dominic Stewart
(eds.). Corpora in Translator Education. Beijing:
Foreign language Teaching and Research Press.
- Zanettin, F. (1998). Bilingual Comparable Corpora and
the Training of Translators. Meta 4, 114.
- 陈江宏 ,(2007),中国翻译人才缺口达60%
翻译界最缺汉译英人才,《北京晚报》,
2007/8/20。
- 徐梅江,
(2004),汉译英基本模式及其发展趋势,
http://www.cctb.net/wjjg/wxb/wxbkycg/200408040002.htm
,2008/4/6
- 杨惠中,(2002),《语料库语言导论》,上海:上海外语教育出版社。
Read
more articles - Free!
E-mail
this article to your colleague!
Need
more translation jobs? Click here!
Translation
agencies are welcome to register here - Free!
Freelance
translators are welcome to register here - Free!
Subscribe
to TranslationDirectory.com newsletter - Free!
Take
part in TranslationDirectory.com poll - your voice counts!
|