English non-finite participial clauses as seen through their Czech counterparts

Abstract

Based on the data from a parallel English-Czech corpus, the present study offers an analysis of 600 English V-ing participial clauses through their Czech translation correspondences, divisible into less and more explicit types. The less explicit Czech counterparts highlight the analytic character of English either in cases where the translation counterpart is synthetic (i.e. merging the meaning of the finite verb and the participle into one verb) or where the participle resembles, in its function, a preposition. The more explicit (i.e. finite-clause) Czech counterparts attest to the backgrounded information status and semantic indeterminacy of the English participial clause. Instead of an expected tendency to render their meaning in Czech by a similar, syntactically subordinated, structure, namely dependent clauses, it is the simple coordination that appears to represent best the semantic indeterminacy of the relation of the English participial clause to its superordinate element. 1 In 1928, in his article in the Theses of the Prague Linguistic Circle Mathesius, drawing a distinction between linguistic characterology (i.e. synchronic comparison of languages) and descriptive grammar, claimed that "[F]or further advancement of linguistic research work it is of vital importance that detailed linguistic characterology of single languages at different stages of their development should be worked up on a purely synchronic basis. [...] Comparison of languages of different types without any regard to their genetic relations is of the greatest value for any work in concrete linguistics characterology" (Mathesius 1928, in Vachek 1964: 60). Mathesius further points out that "the only way of approach to different languages as strictly comparable systems is the functional point of view, since general needs of expression and communication, common to all mankind, are the only common denominators to which means of expression and communication, varying from language to language, can reasonably be brought" (Mathesius 1936: 95).

English Present Participles and Gerunds Functioning as Adverbials and Their Translations Into Czech

“…While for the participle forms by far the most frequent way of translation was by a clause, mainly a main clause (similar results were arrived at by e.g. Malá & Šaldová (2015) in their study based on the parallel corpus Intercorp), for gerunds no particular translation solution which would significantly prevail was found, but altogether there were only three cases of translation by a main clause and seven by a subordinate clause, while the most frequent solutions were by nouns or verbal nouns.…”

Strategies of clausal postmodification in learner English

“…Postmodification by means of present participial clauses is common in formal Czech, but apparently not used to the same extent as in English. In their corpus-based comparative study on translation parallels between English and Czech,Malá & Šaldová (2015) have shown that 42.11% of English post-modifying present participial clauses are translated into equivalent constructions with a deverbal adjective, 8 exceeding the use of equivalent constructions found byCosme (2008) for Dutch translations, and similar to the frequencies observed for French, reproduced in Table1.8. The remaining instances are translated by means of other constituents, such as (coordinate or subordinate) finite clauses (45.61%) and verbless constructions (12.28%).…”

“…bike broken in accident REFL cannot fix 'The bike broken in the accident cannot be fixed' e. *Dům si Petr koupil je moc krásný /Dům, který si Petr koupil, je moc krásný. Percentage of equivalent constructions used to translate English participial clauses, as reported byCosme (2008) andMalá & Šaldová (2015)…”

“…the house REFL Peter bought is very beautiful/the house that REFL Peter bought is very beautiful 'The house Peter bought is very beautiful' /'The house that Peter bought is very beautiful' While all postmodification structures that exist in English have an equivalent construction in Czech, it is yet to be determined to what extent the synthetic preferences of Czech verbal morphology will impact the frequency with which relative clauses are used (seeMalá & Šaldová, 2015 for a discussion of the use of -ing participles by Czech EFL learners). Postmodification by means of present participial clauses is common in formal Czech, but apparently not used to the same extent as in English.…”

Eyes and speech in English, Finnish and Czech children’s literature

“…In Czech, verbless and non-finite clauses are relatively rare (cf. Malá and Šaldová, 2015). The corresponding adverbial meanings can be expressed by a prepositional phrase (example 10b); simultaneity can be inferred from the coordinative relation between two finite clauses linked by the coordinator a ('and') or juxtaposed (example 24 below).…”