Show Less
Restricted access

LSP in Colombia

Advances and challenges


Edited By Gabriel Quiroz Herrera and Pedro Patino Garcia

Studies in LSP in Colombia began in the 1990’s, mainly in the discipline of terminology. Since then, studies in translation, terminology, and LSP have spread out throughout the country. Many papers have been written since then in national and international journals by Colombian authors. This book comprises a set of 20 chapters derived from M.A. and Ph.D. theses of Colombian authors written in Austria, Chile, Colombia, France, Norway, and Spain. The multidisciplinary view of this book includes scholars from translation, linguistics, computer engineering, philosophy, and library and information science. These chapters deal with linguistic, phraseological, terminological, didactic, and textual issues related to terminology, translation, corpus linguistics, and computational linguistics from the Universidad de Antioquia, Universidad de Medellín, Universidad Nacional de Medellín, Universidad Autónoma de Manizales, Universidad EAFIT, Wake Forest University, NHH Norwegian School of Economics, Université Grenoble Alpes, and Université Paris VII.
Show Summary Details
Restricted access

Challenges in the Translation of General and Specialized Phraseology: Germán Mira, John Jairo Giraldo



Challenges in the Translation of General and Specialized Phraseology3


General language (GL) phraseology is formed by phraseological units (PU), defined as word combinations made up of at least two words (throw in the towel), functioning as a single syntactic element, and characterized by a high frequency of use, co-occurrence of their lexical elements, institutionalization in terms of their relative semantic and syntactic fixedness, and different degrees of idiomaticity and syntactic productivity (Corpas1996; García-Page 2008).

Regarding the phraseology of language for special purposes (LSP), the characteristics of specialized phraseological units (SPU) vary substantially with respect to the former due to the peculiarities of the specialized texts in which they are found and to their referential and terminological role. Fraile Vicente (2007: 66) explains this difference by stating that LSP fulfill mainly a communicative function and that they choose the more economical expression and make use of ← 103 | 104 → linguistic resources that transmit information objectively and impersonally.

Following Lorente (2001: 14), SPU can be defined as lexical combinations, which distribute and link specialized knowledge and contain at least one terminological element (comatose patient).

Although LSP and GL phraseology share the characteristics of semantic and syntactic stability and regular compositional patterning, they differ from each other in important aspects. Regarding their differences, Aguado (2007: 57–58) and Bevilacqua (2004: 30–31) agree on the following distinctive characteristics of SPU: presence of a terminological...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.

Do you have any questions? Contact us.

Or login to access all content.