formulaic expressions per 1,000 wor

formulaic expressions per 1,000 words, as we have already seen. This is a relatively
high average that should not be ignored, as an especially large number of errors were
made by the translators when translating many formulaic expressions. It is bad enough
to make a mistake in ORDINARY translation, but in technical translation, for example,
‘[c]onfusing directions accompanying an essential device in a jet plane may result in
disaster’ (Freedman 1958: 10).
From the classification of formulaic expressions, another conclusion to be drawn
is that there is little correlation between the errors within subclasses. For instance, the
percentage of errors in the variable classes was 28.8%, whilst the same percentage in the
invariable classes was 29.6%. However, there is a marked difference between the main
subclasses: the percentage of errors for sentential/pseudo-sentential classes was very
low (4.3%) compared to the total percentage of errors in the sub-sentential classes
(29.8%). This means that the translation of both classes of formulaic expressions is
problematic for translators, but translators must direct their efforts to improving the
quality of the translation towards the translation of sub-sentential classes much more
than to the sentential classes.
The occurrence of a formulaic expression in the corpus should not prompt the
translator to find an exact equivalent in the target language, especially as there might
not be one, but rather to re-read the whole paragraph and select the best possible
translation, even if it means that the formulaic expression in question is not translated
with another formulaic expression in the target language. Formulaic expressions in the
source text do not necessarily require formulaic expressions in the target text.
This leads us to issue of identifying formulaic expressions. Formulaic
expressions may not need formulaic translations but translators do need to recognize
them as formulaic in order to render them into the target text with the appropriate
meaning and identifying formulaic expressions in a text is a difficult task with no magic
solutions at hand. Most of the errors made by the translators of this corpus seem to
indicate that the formulaic expressions in the source text were not recognized as such in
the source texts by the translators, with a resulting infelicitous translation at best and an
ungrammatical and therefore meaningless translation at worst.

Results (English) 1:

formulaic expressions per 1, 000 words, as we have already seen. This is a relativelyhigh average that should not be ignored, as an especially large number of errors weremade by the translators when translating many formulaic expressions. It is bad enoughto make a mistake in ORDINARY translation, but in technical translation, for example,' [c] onfusing directions accompanying an essential device in a jet plane may result indisaster ' (Freedman 1958: 10).From the classification of formulaic expressions, another conclusion to be drawnis that there is little correlation between the errors within subclasses. For instance, thepercentage of errors in the variable classes was 28.8o, whilst the same percentage in theinvariable classes was 29.6b. However, there is a marked difference between the mainsubclasses: the percentage of errors for sentential/pseudo-sentential classes was verylow (4.3i) compared to the total percentage of errors in the sub-sentential classes(29.8o). This means that the translation of both classes of formulaic expressions isproblematic for translators, but translators must direct their efforts to improving thequality of the translation towards the translation of sub-sentential classes much morethan to the sentential classes.The occurrence of a formulaic expression in the corpus should not prompt thetranslator to find an exact equivalent in the target language, especially as there mightnot be one, but rather to re-read the whole paragraph and select the best possibletranslation, even if it means that the formulaic expression in question is not translatedwith another formulaic expression in the target language. Formulaic expressions in thesource text do not necessarily require formulaic expressions in the target text.This leads us to issue of identifying formulaic expressions. Formulaicexpressions may not need formulaic translations but translators do need to recognizethem as formulaic in order to render them into the target text with the appropriatemeaning and identifying formulaic expressions in a text is a difficult task with no magicsolutions at hand. Most of the errors made by the translators of this corpus seem toindicate that the formulaic expressions in the source text were not recognized as such inthe source texts by the translators, with a resulting infelicitous translation at best and anungrammatical and therefore meaningless translation at worst.

Results (English) 3:

公式化的表达，每1000字，正如我们已经看到的。这是一个相对
高平均，不应该被忽视，作为错误的一个特别大的数
由译者在翻译许多套语。这是够糟糕的使普通
翻译错误，但在技术翻译，例如，
“[C] onfusing方向伴随必不可少的装置在一架喷气式飞机可能导致灾难（弗里德曼
1958：10）。从套语
分类，另一个结论是，在
子类之间的误差相关不大。例如，在变量类误差
百分比为28.8%，而在
相同的百分比29.6%类是不变的。然而，这是主要的子类之间的一个显著的区别：
的句子/伪命题类错误率很低（4.3%）
相比在子类错误句子
总数的百分比（29.8%）。这意味着程式化表达这两类翻译是译者
问题，但译者必须致力于提高对亚句子类更多
比句子类翻译翻译
质量。
在语料库中的公式化的表达发生不应该促使
译者在译语中找到对应的，特别是有可能
不是一，而重新阅读整段选择最佳
翻译，即使这意味着问题的公式化的表达不是在目标语言翻译
另一个程式化的表达。在源文本
套语套语不一定需要在目标文本。这使我们识别
程式化表达问题。公式化的表达可能不需要程式翻译
但译者也需要认识到他们的程式
为了渲染成具有适当
意义和识别文本中的公式化的表达，译文是在没有魔法
解一个困难的任务。目前的这个语料库翻译的错误似乎
表明在源文本的程式化表达是不承认的那样在源文本
译者，与造成的不恰当的翻译最好和
不通因而毫无意义的翻译在最坏的情况。