IJLLL 2019 Vol.5(4): 247-252 ISSN: 2382-6282
DOI: 10.18178/IJLLL.2019.5.4.236

A Corpus-Based Comparative Analysis of Cohesive Devices in Two English Translations of The Analects of Confucius

Yuqiu Hou and Yu Sun
Abstract—The translation of discourse, as an important part of the translation field, is the application of the theory of discourse linguistics in translation studies. In text translation, cohesion theory has to be mentioned as an important branch and component of text linguistics, which has already received extensive attention at home and abroad and also shows that there are certain differences between the two languages in English and Chinese, since its first introduction of Halliday and Hasan in 1976. Because of this difference, the use of cohesive devices in translation also affects the quality of the versions of translation.
Moreover, in order to spread Chinese traditional culture and construct Chinese national image, the translation of Chinese classic works has gained a lot of attention of the whole society. Among these Chinese classic works, The Analects of Confucius is one of the most important and well-known works which has a great influence on Chinese thoughts and cultures. So in this paper, the author chooses two translation versions translated by Legge and Ku Hungming and uses the corpus statistics tool to study the cohesive devices in these versions. This paper wants to find some similarities and differences in these two versions and may also give some implications for Chinese-English translation.

Index Terms—English versions of The Analects of Confucius, cohesive devices, comparative study, corpus.

Yuqiu Hou and Yu Sun are with School of Foreign Studies, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an 710072, PR China (e-mail: Yolandahyq@163.com, sunyu@nwpu.edu.cn).

[PDF]

Cite: Yuqiu Hou and Yu Sun, "A Corpus-Based Comparative Analysis of Cohesive Devices in Two English Translations of The Analects of Confucius," International Journal of Languages, Literature and Linguistics vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 247-252, 2019.

Copyright©2008-2019. International Journal of Languages, Literature and Linguistics. All rights reserved.
E-mail: ijlll@ejournal.net