Designing a metalanguage of translation
strategies for translation training:
Demystifying the art of translation
Mayuka Yamamoto (Rikko University), Masaru Yamada (Rikkyo University),
Atsushi Fujita (National Institute of Information and Communications Technology),
Rei Miyata (Nagoya University), and Kyo Kageura (University of Tokyo)

What is a metalanguage of translation strategies fortranslation training?
“metalanguage” is “a language used to talk about language” (MerriamWebster, 2016). Gambier and Doorslaer (2009) use this term in a broader
sense.
The aim of developing metalanguages in this study is both1. to promote our scientific understanding of translation processes, and
2. to facilitate understanding of the process among different actors
involved in translation activities

2Translation strategies
Textual manipulations applied to produce translations beyond accuracy.
ST

There is a boy climbing that tree. He is going to fall if he doesnʼt take care.

TT1 あの⽊に登っている男の⼦がいます。彼は気をつけないと落ちそうです。

[That tree DAT climbing boy NOM exist. he TOP attention ACC pay NOT IF fall seem COP.]
Omitting the topicalized nominative (“he-TOP”)
to improve the cohesion between two sentences

TT2

あの⽊に登っている男の⼦がいます。彼は気をつけないと落ちそうです。
[That tree DAT climbing boy NOM exist. he TOP attention ACC pay NOT IF fall seem COP.]
3

Past work on translation strategies• Vinay and Darbelnet (1958) <7 strategies>• Borrowing / Calque / Literal Translation / Transposition / Modulation/ Equivalence / Adaptation• Pym (2018) <8 strategies>• Copying Words / Copying Structure / Perspective Change / Density Change/ Resegmentation / Compensation / Cultural Correspondence / Text Tailoring• Chesterman (1997/2016) <30 strategies in total>• Consisting of three main groups each contains ten strategies• Syntactic (G), Semantic (S), and Pragmatic (Pr) strategies• Not adaptable to English-to-Japanese translation (Bode 2009)
Just a list! no navigation!
not operationalizable!
4

e.g., The typology in Chesterman (1997/2016）
Syntactic strategies (10)Semantic strategies (10)Pragmatic strategies (10)G1Literal Translation

S1

Synonymy

Pr1

Cultural filtering

G2Loan, calqueS2

Antonymy

Pr2

Explicitness change

G3Transposition

S3

Hyponymy

Pr3

Information change

G4

Unit shift

S4

ConversesPr4

Interpersonal change

G5

Phrase structure change

S5

Abstraction change

Pr5

Illocutionary change

G6

Clause structure change

S6

Distribution change

Pr6

Coherence change

G7

Sentence structure change S7Emphasis change

Pr7

Partial translation

G8Cohesion change

S8

Paraphrase

Pr8

Visibility change

G9

Level shift

S9

Trope change

Pr9Transediting

G10 Scheme change

S10 Other semantic changes Pr10 Other pragmatic changes• Given a pair of unpolished and polished TTs,
it is difficult to consistently determine the strategies applied there• Consequently, these labels cannot be a useful communication tool
• e.g., between instructors and learners
5Our work
Developed a metalanguage of translation strategies• Especially aiming at the use in education of English-to-Japanese translation• Language that talks about translation strategies (manipulation of language)• Sufficient coverage• Systematic use• Tangible and learnable granularity, etc.
• Our approach: Chesterman (1997/2006) as a point of departure• Improve the coverage• Reorganize the structure into decision lists to have the systematicity• Through applying it to English-to-Japanese translation examples
Used in an actual English-to-Japanese translation training course
6Step 1. Preparation of translation examples
1-1. Prepare text triplets: <ST, Unpolished TT, Polished TT>• Unpolished TT: TT in which the word order of the ST is kept as unchanged as
possible, no propositional or grammatical errors are included in the target text,
and the information in the source text is conveyed without excess or deficiency.
• Polished TT: TT where some aspects of the Unpolished TT are improved.
<ST>
There is a boy climbing that tree. He is going to fall if he doesnʼt take care.
<Unpolished TT>
あの⽊に登っている男の⼦がいます。彼は気をつけないと落ちてしまいそうです。
[That tree DAT climbing boy NOM exist. he TOP attention ACC pay NOT IF fall seem COP.]<Polished TT>
あの⽊に登っている男の⼦がいます。彼は気をつけないと落ちてしまいそうです。
[That tree DAT climbing boy NOM exist. he TOP attention ACC pay NOT IF fall seem COP.]
7

Step 1. Preparation of translation examples
1-1. Prepare text triplets: <ST, Unpolished TT, Polished TT>• Extract the triplets from two translation training handbooks• (Tanabe and Mitsufuji 2008; Mitsufuji 2016)• Newly create Unpolished TT if missing
1-2. Decompose triplets into examples (249 examples)• Each focus on independent pairs of text spans.
<ST>
Mr. Koizumi angered the Chinese government with his visits to Tokyoʼs Yasukuni Shrine.
<Unpolished TT>
⼩泉⾸相は東京の靖国神社への訪問を⾏い、中国政府の怒りを買った。
Tokyoʼsvisits<Polished TT>
worship
⼩泉⾸相は靖国神社への参拝を⾏い、中国政府の怒りを買った。
Example 1Example 2

8

Step 2. Development of metalanguage
2-1. For each example, assign a strategy triplet <G, S, Pr> from Chestermanʼs typology• All the possible strategies if applicable• “Unknown” if nothing is applicable<ST>
Mr. Koizumi angered the Chinese government with his visits to Tokyoʼs Yasukuni Shrine.
<Unpolished TT>
⼩泉⾸相は東京の靖国神社への訪問を⾏い、中国政府の怒りを買った。
Tokyoʼsvisits<Polished TT>
worship
⼩泉⾸相は靖国神社への参拝を⾏い、中国政府の怒りを買った。
Example 1(G??) Unknown(S1) No change(Pr3) Information change

Example 2(G1) Literal translation(S5) Abstraction change / (S8) Paraphrase(Pr10) Other pragmatic changes
9Step 2. Development of metalanguage
Our metalanguage consists of a typology and decision lists
2-2. Add new strategies explaining “Unknown” phenomena to the tail of typology• For improved coverage
2-3. Refine both the typology and the decision lists• For improved systematicity• Refinement include reordering, merging, and adjusting the scope• For strategies that may be applied more than one to a single phenomenon,
we prioritize those with smaller translation units.
• e.g., (G3) word structure change > (G5) phrase structure change> (G6) clause structure change > (G7) sentence structure change• For strategies that describe only specific cases of another one, we first pickthose specific ones rather than the general one.
• e.g., (S2) Antonymy > (S8) Paraphrase• Refine the scope (narrow/widen)

10Step 2. Development of metalanguage<ST>
Mr. Koizumi angered the Chinese government with his visits to Tokyoʼs Yasukuni Shrine.
<Unpolished TT>
⼩泉⾸相は東京の靖国神社への訪問を⾏い、中国政府の怒りを買った。
Tokyoʼsvisits<Polished TT>
worship
⼩泉⾸相は靖国神社への参拝を⾏い、中国政府の怒りを買った。
Example 1(G??) Unknown(S1) No change(Pr3) Information change
Step 2-2(G12) Omission(S1) No change(Pr3) Information change

Example 2(G1) Literal translation(S5) Abstraction change / (S8) Paraphrase(Pr10) Other pragmatic changes
Step 2-3(G1) Literal translation(S5) Abstraction change(Pr11) Pragmatically equivalent11

Our metalanguage of translation strategies
Syntactic strategies (13)Semantic strategies (9)Pragmatic strategies (10)G1Literal Translation

S2

Antonymy

Pr9

Transediting

G13

Punctuation change

S4

Converses

Pr1

Cultural filtering

G9

Modality shift

S3

Hyponymy

Pr2

Explicitness change

G8

Cohesion change

S5

Abstraction change

Pr3

Information change

G11

Addition

S7

Emphasis change

Pr4Interpersonal change

G12Omission

S6

Distribution change

Pr5

Illocutionary change

G3

Word structure change

S9

Trope change

Pr13

External Information adaptation

G5

Phrase structure change

S8Paraphrase

Pr12

Domain adaptation

G6

Clause structure change

S1

Semantically equivalent

Pr6

Coherence change

G7

Sentence structure change

Pr11

Pragmatically equivalent

G4

Unit shift

G2

Loan

G10

Scheme changeFeatures• 4 categories merged into other ones: S10, Pr7-8, Pr10
• Newly introduced 6 strategies: G11-13, Pr11-13• A decision list (linear order of priority) for each group12

Decision making using a decision list
<ST>
Mr. Koizumi angered the Chinese government with his visits to Tokyoʼs Yasukuni Shrine.
<Unpolished TT>
⼩泉⾸相は東京の靖国神社への訪問を⾏い、中国政府の怒りを買った。
Tokyoʼs<Polished TT>
⼩泉⾸相は靖国神社への参拝を⾏い、中国政府の怒りを買った。
Check whether the condition is satisfied (Yes à, No à) from top of the list
Pragmatic strategies (10)Is the ambiguity resolved?

Pr9Transediting

Is the culture-related aspects in the ST adapted to, or retained in, the target culture?

Pr1

Cultural filtering

Is the implicit content in ST explicitated in TT, or vice versa?

Pr2

Explicitness change

Is the non-existtent information in ST added in TT to compensate for the readers knowledge,
or is existing information in ST deleted in TT as it is unnecessary?

Pr3

Information change

Is the formality/sentimate changed according to the relation between authors and readers?

Pr4Interpersonal change

Is the speech type changed?

Pr5

Illocutionary change

13

Evaluating the metalanguage in translation learning
Is the metalanguage usable to acquire translation strategies?
We evaluated it through using it in an actual translation learning course• 51 undergraduate students (analyzed 15 out of them)• Protocol
1. Refinement pre-task: Given pairs of <ST, Unpolished TT> for two SDs(A and B), produce Polished TT by editing Unpolished TT• Reference: <ST, Polished TT> for other two SDs (M1 and M2)
2. Learning the metalanguage• Typology, decision list, examples, etc.
3. Refinement post-task: Same as pre-task, but for two new SDs (C and D)• Reference: <ST, Unpolished, Polished TT> for M1 and M2
annotated with the strategy triplets <G, S, Pr>• Done within one week during April 28 to June 15, 2021
14

How differently were the strategies used?
Comparison of relative frequencies of each strategy triplet <G, S, Pr>• Relative frequency: number of example in 100 source words

Relative frequency in the Post-task

3.00

Used more in
the post-task

2.50

G1, S8, Pr11

2.00

G8, S1, Pr11

(G8) Cohesion change
1.50 (S1) No change(Pr11) No change

0.00

G1, S1, Pr11

G13, S1, Pr1

1.00
0.50

(G1) No change(S8) Paraphrase(Pr11) No change

G7, S7, Pr11

G12, S1, Pr11
G1, S7, Pr11G3, S1, Pr11
G8, S5, Pr11
G4, S1, Pr11

G12, S1, Pr12
G11, S5, Pr11

(G1) No change(S1) No change(Pr11) No change

Used less inthe post-task

G1, S1, Pr12
G13, S1, Pr11G1, S6, Pr11
G3, G11,G1,
S2, Pr12
S1,
Pr11
G13,
S1,
S1,
Pr4
Pr12
S1,G11,
Pr3
G5,
G1,
S1,
Pr11
S5,
Pr11
G13,
S7,
Pr11
G11,
G6, S4, Pr11
G4,
G1,
G7,
S1,
S4,
S1,
Pr12
G11,
Pr11
G1,
G11,
G4,
S5,S7,S1,
Pr3
S7,Pr11Pr4
Pr11S1,
G9,Pr11
S1, Pr11
G8,
G12,
G5,
G12,
G3,G4,
S8,S8,
S8,
S5,
Pr11
Pr12
S8,
Pr11
Pr11
Pr11
Pr11
G1,
G11,G4,
G5,G8,
G9,
G4,
G6,
G12,
G9,
S8,
S1,
S5,
S8,
G8,
S5,
S6,
S4,
Pr4
Pr3
Pr2
Pr12
Pr11
G6,
S7,
Pr11
S1,
Pr11
Pr4
S7,
Pr11
S1,
Pr3
Pr11
Pr4
G3, S5, Pr11

0.00

0.50

1.00
1.50
Relative frequency in the Pre-task

2.00

2.50
15

(G1, S8, Pr11) were used more
(G1) No change(S8) Paraphrase(Pr11) No change<ST>
Hundreds of thousands of civilians were killed̶many instantly, and many more slowly
from severe burns and what would come to be understood as radiation sickness.
<Unpolished TT>
何⼗万もの市⺠が死亡した―多くが即時に、さらに多くが重症熱傷や、後に放射線疾患と理解されることになるもので徐々に死亡した。
<Polished TT>
何⼗万もの市⺠が死亡した―多くが即時に、さらに多くが重症熱傷や、後に放射線疾患と理解されることになるものでゆっくりと死亡した。

16

(G8, S1, Pr11) were used more
(G8) Cohesion change(S1) No change(Pr11) No change<ST>
Real Trump speaks, and tweets, his mind. Teleprompter Trump reads speeches preparedfor him, delivered in a strained manner that has been likened to a hostage video.
<Unpolished TT>
本物のトランプは、⾃分の⼼の中を話し、ツイートする。テレプロンプター・トランプは、彼のために⽤意されたスピーチを読み上げ、⼈質のビデオに例えられるような緊張した様⼦で発信する。
<Polished TT>
本物のトランプは、⾃分の⼼の中を話し、ツイートする。それに対しテレプロンプター・ト
ランプは、彼のために⽤意されたスピーチを読み上げ、⼈質のビデオに例えられるような緊張した様⼦で発信する。

17

Can students make revisions like professional?
Asked a professional translator to produce Polished TT for documents A to D.
Computed recall: identical revisions / revisions done by the professional translator
50%
45%
40%
Recall in the Post-task

All the (analyzed) students
improved recall throughlearning strategies

HK35%

DFOB

L
C30%
25%

GJ20%

NIAM

E

15%
10%
5%0%0%

5%

10%

15%
20%
Recall in the Pre-task

25%30%
18

Conclusion• Developed a metalangauge of translation strategies• Especially aiming at the use for English-to-Japanese translation training• Methodology• Starting from Chesterman (1997/2006)• Metalanguage = typology + decision list
• Result: Structured list of 13 Syntactic, 9 Semantic, and 10 Pragmatic strategies• Used in an actual English-to-Japanese translation training course• Comparison of 2 docs in pre-task and 2 docs in post-task• Observations from the partial results• There are several strategy triplets that are more/less used
• Student made more professional-like revisions after learning
19

Ongoing and future work
• (Rigorous) intrinsic validation• (We have conducted preliminary validation before using it in the classroom)• Coverage: whether it sufficiently covers wide range of translation strategies• using unseen SDs of diverse text types• Systematicity: whether it helps different annotators assign strategies consistently• using wide range of examples and diverse levels of annotators• Deployment and extrinsic validation• Learnability: whether the students can understand and use the strategies• through a more controlled protocol• Effectiveness: whether the students can produce translations of better quality

20