Systemic Functional Perspectives
Edited By Stella Neumann, Rebekah Wegener, Jennifer Fest, Paula Niemietz and Nicole Hützen
Linguistics, like any discipline, is full of boundaries. However, in nature, as Ruqaiya Hasan points out, there are no clear cut boundaries. The participants of the 42nd International Systemic Functional Congress held at RWTH Aachen University addressed and challenged the notion of boundaries in linguistics in many creative ways. Twenty-one of the papers presented at the congress are collated in this volume. The six sections cover topics that challenge theoretical notions and stances, and explore historical, interpersonal and lexicogrammatical boundaries as well as those between languages and in language development. The volume presents a state of the art overview of systemic functional linguistic theorising with extensions into other theoretical frameworks.
Text production and produced texts (Daniel Couto-Vale)
Daniel Couto-Vale RWTH Aachen Universitydanielvale@icloud.com
Text production and produced texts
Abstract: The paper discusses a basis for a systemic and functional theory of translation both as text production and as a series of produced texts to enable the grounding of cognitive and semantic hypotheses on observable linguistic phenomena. The goal of this framework is to allow the creation of explanations of translation behaviour in terms of cognitive processes.
Since the advent of key-logging systems such as Translog (Carl 2012), much of the work in translation studies (Dragsted 2004, 2005) has focused on the interface between text production and text as product. However, when researchers started annotating writing bursts in terms of the text segments that were written or rewritten, it became evident that translators did not read and write one grammatical unit at a time. Based exclusively on writing events, it was already clear that writing pauses can be explained not only in terms of a source text segment just read but also in terms of a target text segment just read or just produced (Alves and Couto-Vale 2009, 2011).
Five years later, attempts to integrate eye-tracking data are still ongoing. With rough word-gaze mappings, another wave of over-simplified word-gaze-mind relations have become prominent. When tapping this kind of data, we should learn from past experience and avoid the kind of uncritical inferences that were done in the past (Rayner 1998; Huestegge et al. 2008).
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.