Download PROBLEMS OF ADJECTIVE SEQUENCING IN ENGLISH

PROBLEMS OF ADJECTIVE
SEQUENCING IN ENGLISHARABIC TRANSLATION
A Thesis Submitted
By
ARIF ABDULLAH SALEEM AL-ASHOOR
To
The Council of the College of Arts
University of Mosul
In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements
For the Degree of
Master of Arts
In
Translation
Supervised
By
Assistant Professor
DR. MISBAH M. D. AL-SULAIMAAN
2004 A.D.
1425 A.H.
6
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my warmest thanks and deepest
gratitude to my supervisor Dr. Misbah M. D. Al-Sulaimaan whose
excellent guidance, valuable remarks and his encouragement, have
all been very significant to this study. It is through my supervisor
that I was first introduced to the study and translation of adjective
ordering, and subsequently became interested in this field of study.
Special thanks must go to Professor Dr. Zuhair G. Farhan
(Head of English Department who gave me and my colleagues very
rich lectures in translation. I am also grateful to all my teachers who
taught me during the qualifying year, particularly, Dr. MuhammedBasil Q. Y. Al-Azzawi, Mr. Rabee’ M. Q. Agha and Dr. Muhammed
Abdulla D. Al-Mallah.
I am also indebted to all my colleagues who helped me in one
way or another.
It remains for me to record my deepest feelings and gratitude
to my family, particularly, my wife and children; without their
continuous encouragement and help this work would have never
been achieved.
7
ABSTRACT
Adjective sequencing in both English and Arabic is still
controversial. Some grammarians believe that adjectives can be ordered
either syntactically and/or semantically or both. Others, believe that they
can be ordered according to native speaker’s intuition, emphasis shift or
language use. Translators face some problems in rendering this ordering
because of the difference between the modification system in English and
Arabic.
This thesis aims, mainly, at: (1) studying adjective ordering in
English and Arabic, (2) specifying different patterns of adjective ordering
in some books of grammar, (3) showing how the specified patterns are
realized in Arabic, and (4) showing the type of translation that has been
used by the subjects.
In order to achieve the above mentioned aims, the study
hypothesizes that: (1) translation of adjective ordering poses some serious
problems for translators as well as learners of English, (2) there is no oneto-one correspondence between the modification system in English and
Arabic, (3) there is no one-to-one correspondence between adjective
ordering in both languages.
To test the validity of these hypotheses, twenty different patterns of
adjective ordering from different books of English grammar were chosen.
These examples were given to five subjects (assistant lectures at the
Department of Translation/ College of Arts/ University of Mosul) for
rendering them.
8
The main findings arrived at in this study are:
(1)
There is no one-to-one correspondence between adjective ordering
in English and Arabic. In English, this ordering is governed by some
syntactic and semantic rules, whereas in Arabic, it is governed by
speaker’s intuition, emphasis shift and language usage. This results in
inadequate and inaccurate renderings.
(2)
All subjects used both semantic and communicative translations
with varying percentages. (24) instances (24%) were translated
semantically, whereas (76) instances (76%) were translated
communicatively.
(3)
In English, the use of articles (definite and indefinite) are mutually
exclusive with the use of demonstrative pronouns. While in Arabic the
definite article ‘ ‫’ألـ‬is not mutually exclusive with the demonstrative
pronouns. As for the indefinite article, it does not exist in Arabic.
In the final chapter, general conclusions, and some recommendations and suggestions for further studies were proposed.
9
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Subject
Page
Acknowledgements ……………………………………………….
iii
Abstract……………………………………………………………
iv
Table of Contents………………………………………………….
vi
List of Abbreviations……………………………………………...
x
List of Tables……………………………………………………...
xi
Chapter One: Introduction
1.1. Statement of the Problem……………………………………..
1
1.2. Aims of the Study…………………………………………….
2
1.3. Hypotheses……………………………………………………
2
1.4. Procedure and Data Collection……………………………….
3
1.5. Scope of the Study……………………………………………
3
1.6. Value of the Study……………………………………………
4
Chapter Two: Literature Review
2.1.
Adjectives in
5
English……………………………………….
2.1.1.2.
2.1.1. Adjectives in Different Schools of English Grammar……...
10
2.1.1.1. Adjectives in Traditional Grammar………………………
10
Adjectives in Structural
12
Grammar………………………
2.1.1.3. Adjectives in Transformational Generative Grammar…...
13
2.1.2. Characteristics of Adjectives……………………………….
14
2.1.2.1. Adjectives as Modifiers ………………………………….
17
10
2.1.2.2. Adjectives and Other Modifiers…………………………..
17
2.1.2.3. Central and Peripheral Adjectives ……………………….
19
2.1.2.4. Adjectives and Participles………………………………...
20
2.1.3. Nouns Functioning as Adjectives…………………………..
21
Subject
Page
2.2. Syntactic Classification of Adjectives ……………………….
23
2.2.1. Attributive Adjectives………………………………………
25
2.2.2. Predicative Adjectives……………………………………...
32
2.2.3. Postpositive Adjectives……………………………………..
35
2.2.4. Adjectives as Head of Noun phrases……………………….
37
2.3. Semantic Classification of Adjectives………………………..
39
2.3.1. Stative/Dynamic …………………………………………...
39
2.3.2. Gradable /Non-Gradable……………………………………
39
2.3.3. Inherent/Non-Inherent……………………………………...
40
2.4. Adjective Ordering in English………………………………..
41
2.4.1. Syntactic Ordering of Adjectives ………………………….
41
2.4.1.1. Bloomfield’s View……………………………………….
41
2.4.1.2. Krapp’s View…………………………………………….
41
2.4.1.3. Others’ View……………………………………………..
42
2.4.1.3.1 Distributive Adjectives …………………………………
42
2.4.1.3.2 Indefinite Adjectives…………………………………….
43
2.4.1.3.3. Demonstratives and Articles …………………………...
44
2.4.1.3.4. Possessive Adjectives…………………………………..
45
2.4.1.3.5. Ordinal and Cardinal Adjectives……………………….
45
2.4.1.3.6. Proper Adjectives……………………………………….
46
2.4.2. Semantic Ordering of Adjectives…………………………...
47
2.4.2.1. Sledd’s View….………………………………………….
47
2.4.2.2. Corder’s View…………………………………………….
47
11
2.4.2.3. Crystal’s View.………………………………………..….
48
2.4.2.4. Baily’s View……………………………………………..
49
2.4.2.5. Svatko’s View…………………………………………….
49
2.4.2.6. Swan’s View……………………………………………...
50
Subject
Page
2.4.2.7. Quirk et al’s View………………………………………...
51
2.4.2.8. Collins’s View……………………………………………
52
2.4.2.9. Colchester English Study Centre’s View………………...
53
2.4.2.10. The English Club’s View………………………………..
53
2.4.2.11. The English Language Centre’s View…………………..
54
2.4.2.12. Dixen’s View……………………………………………
54
2.4.2.13. Driven’s View…………………………………………...
56
2.4.2.14. British Council’s View………………………………….
57
2.4.2.15. Oba’s View……………………………………………...
57
2.4.2.16. Darling’s View…………………………………………..
58
2.4.2.17. British Royal’s View …………………………………...
59
2.4.2.18. Haggren’s View…………………………………………
59
2.4.2.19. Moure’s View…………………………………………...
60
2.4.2.20. Our Own View…………………………………………..
60
2.5. Adjectives in Arabic………………………………………….
62
2.6. Types of Adjectives…………………………..………………
63
2.7. Adjective Comparison in Arabic…………………………….
64
2.8. Comparison of English and Arabic Adjectives………………
64
2.9. Adjective Ordering in Arabic…………………………….…..
65
Chapter Three: Translation, Data Analysis,
and Findings and Discussion
3.1. Translation: General Remarks ……………………………....
68
3.2. Equivalence in Translation…………………………………..
69
12
3.3. Transference in Translation………………………………….
71
3.4. Free Translation……………………………………………..
72
3.5. Communicative Translation…………………………………
72
3.6. Semantic Translation………………………………………...
74
Subject
Page
3.7. Accuracy and Translation…………………………………...
75
3.8. Adequacy and Translation…………………………………...
75
3.9. Translation and Structural Ambiguity……………………….
77
3.9.1 Structural Ambiguity……………………………………….
77
3.10 Data Analysis……………………………………………….
78
3.11. Findings and Discussion …………………………………..
106
Chapter Four: Conclusions, Recommendations,
and Suggestions for Further Research
4.1 Conclusions…………………………………………………..
109
4.2 Recommendations …………………………………………...
111
4.3 Suggestions for Further Studies ……………………………..
111
Bibliography …………………………………………………….
113
Abstract in Arabic………………………………………………..
114
13
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS(1)
(1)
Card.
Cardinal
Col.
Colour
Com.
Communicative
Cond.
Condition
D.
Determiner
Denom.
Denominal
H.
Head
Mat.
Material
N.
Noun
Nat.
Nationality
Ord.
Ordinary
Poss.
Possessive
Pur.
Purpose
Sem.
Semantic
SL
Source Language
SLT
Source Language Text
TL
Target Language
TLTs
Target Language Texts
Val.
Value
Most of these abbreviations are used only in tables of analysis because of the space
limit.
14
LIST OF TABLES
No.
Subject
Page
Table (1)
Traditionalist’s Model…………………………
12
Table (2)
Structuralist’s Model…………………………..
13
Table (3)
Bloomfield’s Model…………………………...
41
Table (4)
Krapp’s Model………………………………...
42
Table (5)
Sledd’s Model…………………………………
47
Table (6)
Crystal’s Model……………………………….
49
Table (7)
Baily’s Model…………………………………
49
Table (8)
Svatko’s Model………………………………..
49
Table (9)
Swan’s Model…………………………………
50
Table (10)
Quirk et al’s Model……………………………
51
Table (11)
Colchester’s Model……………………………
53
Table (12)
The English Club’s Model…………………….
53
Table (13)
The English Language Centre’s Model……….
54
Table (14)
Dixen’s Model………………………………...
55
Table (15)
Driven’s Model………………………………..
56
Table (16)
British Council’s Model………………………
57
Table (17)
Oba’s Model…………………………………..
57
Table (18)
Darling’s Model……………………………….
58
Table (19)
British Royal’s Model…………………………
59
Table (20)
Moure’s Model………………………………..
60
Table (21)
Our Own Model……………………………….
61
15
CHAPTER ONE
Introduction
1.1. Statement of the Problem:
The study of adjective ordering has received a great deal of
attention by linguists. However, to the best of our knowledge, no work
has been conducted on the study of the translation of adjective ordering
from English into Arabic. This thesis is an attempt to fill that gap.
Linguists believe that adjective ordering should not be taken for
granted, since there is no limit to the number of premodifying adjectives,
i.e., one can use an infinite number of adjectives to modify a noun
(Crystal, 1971: 128). Despite the fact that this is the case, in usage, one
does not expect such long sequences of adjectives. Added to this, one
does not know whether adjectives are thrown randomly or their ordering
is governed by some syntactic and/or semantic rules. As for translators,
one should say that they also face some problems because the system of
modification in English and Arabic is different. In English, adjectives
usually premodify the head in any noun phrase. While in Arabic,
adjectives premodify and postmodify the head. Furthermore, emphasis of
shift in adjective ordering is variable from English to that of Arabic. In
Arabic, it has a greater role to than that of English, simply, because
Arabic is characterized by flexibility of word order. So, the big question
that can be raised is whether translators should translate semantically or
communicatively in order to give an effective rendering? This question
should be answered in our study otherwise, the problem remains
unsolved.
16
1.2. Aims of the Study:
1
The present study is an attempt to achieve the following aims:
1.
To give a comprehensive study of adjectives in English and Arabic.
2.
To study adjective ordering in English and Arabic.
3.
To specify different patterns of adjective ordering in different
contexts in English.
4.
To indicate the positional order in which adjectives occur in
succession preceding a noun.
5.
To establish an eclectic model of adjective ordering in English
comprising syntax and semantics.
6.
To show how the specified patterns are realized in Arabic.
7.
To show the type of translation that has been used by the subjects.
8.
To propose a new rendering in case the given renderings are
inadequate and inaccurate.
9.
To propose some recommendations for translators and some
suggestions for further studies.
1.3. Hypotheses:
In the present study, it is hypothesized that:
1.
Translation of adjective ordering poses serious problems for
translators as well as learners of English.
2.
Since, there is no one-to-one correspondence between the
modifica-tion system in English and Arabic; therefore, translators who
adopt communicative translation are more successful than those who
adopt semantic translation.
17
3.
Adjective ordering in English is governed by syntactic and/or
semantic rules. While in Arabic, it is governed by native speakers’
intuition, language usage and the shift of emphasis.
4.
There is no one-to-one correspondence between adjective ordering
in English and Arabic.
1.4. Scope of the Study:
The present study is confined to the syntactic and semantic
classification of adjective ordering in English and Arabic. Morphological
and pragmatic classifications will be ignored, since the study aims,
mainly, at showing how adjective ordering is realized in Arabic. Twenty
adjective sequences from different books of grammar with their five
renderings will be chosen as units of analyses because of time and space
limits. The study limits itself to a one-direction translation, viz., from
English into Arabic.
1.5. Procedure and Data Collection:
The procedure used in this study can be summarized as follows:
1.
A theoretical background of adjective ordering has been given and
an eclectic model which is syntactically and semantically based has
been adopted.
2.
Twenty different patterns of adjective ordering from different
books of grammar were chosen.
3.
The adjective sequences under discussion have been given to five
subjects (Assistant Lecturers at the Department of Translation/
College of Arts/ University of Mosul) for rendering them.
18
4.
A thorough analysis of the Source Language Texts and their
renderings in terms of adjective ordering (for instance, Determiners,
Ordinal Numbers, Cardinal Numbers, Adjectives of Value, Size,
Height, Colour, Nationality …. etc.) were given by means of
comprehensive tables.
5.
Findings of texts analyses were discussed thoroughly and general
conclusions were drawn.
1.6. Value of the Study:
The current study, to the best of our knowledge, is the first
attempt to study the translation of adjective ordering from English into
Arabic. Consequently, it is hoped that it will be of a great value to
translators, teachers of translation and students of translation. In addition,
it is meant to be significant for researchers investigating the area of
adjective ordering and the modification system in both English and
Arabic both in the field of contrastive studies and applied linguistics, i.e.,
for learners of English.
19
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Adjectives in English:
Syntactically speaking, an adjective can appear in different
positions in a sentence, as a modifier of the noun (a useful book) or a
complement of copular verbs like ‘be’ (This book is interesting).
Semantically speaking, adjectives, more than other categories, are able to
take different meanings depending on their context. The following
examples are illustrative.
(1) A difficult child.
(2) A difficult book.
Priestly (1761) was, perhaps, the first English Grammarian to
recognize the adjective as an independent part of speech, though some
earlier writers had used the term in this way. Since the mid-19th C, some
writers have used the word modifier to signify ‘a word, phrase or
clause which modifies another’ (The New Fowlers Modern English
Usage 2002: 5).
Krapp (1948: 2) suggests that the chief function of the adjectives
is to point out and describe persons or things, e.g.
(3) He picked up a smooth, round stone.
(4) She is an intelligent lawyer.
20
House and Harman (1931: 73) point out that an adjective is a
word used with a noun or another substantive as a modifier to describe or
define it. When classified, as a form, adjectives may be said to be simple
or compound. The simple adjectives are those whose primary function is
5
adjectival: ‘good’, ‘tough’, ‘young’, ‘old’, etc. The compound adjectives
are words or phrases combined to describe or define noun-words: ‘alive’,
‘asleep’, ‘homesick’, etc. Sometimes,
the component parts of the
1
compound adjectives are joined by hyphens: ‘head-strong’, ‘farfetched’, ‘blue-green’, ‘up-to-date’, etc.
Mitchell (1931: 61) says that an adjective is ‘a word that modifies
the meaning of substantive’. Greever and Jones (1939: 88) also refer to
the term modifier as ‘a word or expression used to describe or limit the
meaning of another word’.
Francis (1958: 424) points out that adjectives are marked by their
ability to fill certain positions and to follow qualifiers; base adjectives
have the inflections (-er) and (-est) and form nouns and adverbs with the
derivational suffixes (-ness) and (-ly); derived adjectives are formed from
various bases by derivational suffixes like (-ous), (-al), and (-able). In
addition to the notion mentioned above, Francis (1958: 322) adds that on
rare occasions, adjectives may be modified by other adjectives and the
expressions are likely to be stereotyped, such as the following:
Icy cold, dark blue
21
Romine (1958: 93) points out that an adjective limits the meaning
of a noun or pronoun by answering one of these three questions:
Which one?
(his book)
What kind?
(sympathetic person)
How many?
(one nail)
Morsberger (1965: 141) argues that adjectives answer the
question of ‘which’, ‘whose’, or ‘what kind’. Thus, we can add
adjectives to adjectives: when ‘blue’ modifies ‘dress’ we can ask what
‘kind’ of blue and get a ‘dark blue dress’.
(4) The sick old merchant’s three very beautiful tall blonde daughters.
To avoid stacking adjectives as in (4), some grammarians advise to use as
few adjectives as possible. If an adjective is used along with a noun, it is
said to be an Epithet, e.g.
(5) Sweat dream.
(Humphreys, 1945: 52)
One of the simple definitions of adjective is that of Quirk, et al
(1972: 231) in that an “adjective modifies or describes a noun or a
pronoun”. Looking at a word in isolation is not a decisive matter to
decide whether the word is adjective or not. It is true that many adjectives
can be inflected for the comparative and superlative degree e.g.: great,
greater, greatest. Also many adjectives provide the base from, which
adverbs are derived, by means of an (-ly) suffix, e.g.: adjective: happy;
adverb: happily (Quirk, et al, 1972: 231).
Jackson (1982: 63) remarks that adjectives amplify the meaning
of a noun, either by occurring immediately before it, e.g.
22
(6) The wide road.
Or by being linked to it by means of a copula, e.g.
(7) The road is / becomes wide.
For this reason, adjectives are often considered as descriptive words. Like
verbs, adjectives may be divided into dynamic and stative while verbs are
typically dynamic, adjectives may be stative or dynamic, e.g.
(8) Jim is tall.
(stative)
(9) Jim is being careful.
(dynamic)
The other view that Chalker (1984: 162) talks about is that
modern grammarians prefer to define adjective-like other major word
classes-by (a) position/function and (b) form and inflection. We can,
however, say that many adjectives denote qualities. In other words, they
often have a sort of descriptive meaning.
Crystal (1985: 7) states that an adjective is “a term used in the
grammatical classification of words to refer to the main set of items,
which specify the attributes of nouns”.
Veit (1986: 28-31) says that an adjective is “a word that describes
(or modifies) a noun”. Let us consider the underlined noun phrases in
(10), (11) and (12):
(10) The tiresome monkey saw a leopard.
(11) The native tourist bought a defective camera.
(12) Good fences make good neighbours.
The words ‘tiresome’, ‘native’, ‘defective’ and ‘good’ are all adjectives.
23
MacFadyen (1996: 3) remarks that an adjective modifies a noun or
a pronoun by describing, identifying, or quantifying words. An adjective
usually precedes the noun or the pronoun which it modifies, e.g.
(13) The small boat foundered on the wine dark sea.
Baure (1997: 3) claims that an adjective describes how something
‘is’. It is used to describe a noun. It does not have a singular or plural
form or a masculine, feminine and neuter form. An adjective cannot be
pluralized in English. It can be placed at the end of a sentence if it
describes the subject of a sentence.
An adjective has been also defined by (McArthur, 2002: 5) as an
“addition to the name of a thing to describe the thing more fully or
definitely”.
Feder (2002: 13) points out that an adjective is often defined as a
“word which describes or gives more information about noun or pronoun.
It describes nouns in terms of such qualities as size, colour, number and
kind”.
Haggren (2003: 1) mentions some points related to the position of
adjectives. They are as follows:
1.
There are two main positions for adjectives: before a noun, or as a
complement of a linking verb.
2.
Most adjectives can be used in either of these positions, but some
adjectives can only be used in one.
3.
Some adjectives that describe size or age can come after a noun
group consisting of a number or determiner and a noun that indicates
the unit of measurement.
24
4.
A few adjectives have a different meaning depending on whether
they come before the first noun.
After this brief review of the term, one can summarize the basic
characteristics of adjectives as follows:
1.
Adjectives are identified by their ability to fill the position between
a noun-determiner and a noun and the position after a linking verb,
e.g.
The strong man is very clever.
2.
Adjectives are of two kinds; base adjectives and derived adjectives.
Examples:
3.
deep, safe.
(base adjectives)
active, friendly.
(derived adjectives)
They can be used attributively, e.g.
The main reason.
4.
They can be used predicatively, e.g.
The boy is asleep.
5.
They can be premodified by intensifiers, e.g.
The girls are very happy.
6.
They can take comparative and superlative forms, e.g.
a. Paul is taller than Peter.
b. Paul is the tallest one in the class.
25
7.
Adjectives have no plural forms in English, e.g.
Elsa likes hard candies.
8. Adjectives are called modifiers because they do something to change
or modify a noun, e.g.
The man is tall, rich and handsome.
2.1.1. Adjectives in Different Schools of English Grammar:
Adjectives have been viewed differently by different grammarians
and different schools of grammar. In what follows, we will present these
views in some detail:
2.1.1.1. Adjectives in Traditional Grammar:
Traditional grammarians focus on the form of the adjective. It was
studied in the 16th century. This grammatical form is derived from Latin.
Traditional grammarians identify the categories of parts of speech. These
parts are eight. The adjective category is one of these parts.
Traditional grammarians provide short definitions for adjectives.
Huddleston (1984: 91), for instance, defines adjective as a “word that
modifies a noun or pronoun”, i.e., a word that is used with a noun or
pronoun to describe or point out the living being or lifeless thing
designated by the noun or pronoun: little boy, that boy, a little house.
C. Eckersley and J. Eckersley (1960: 64) say that “an adjective is
a word that qualifies a noun, adds to its meaning, but limits its
application”.
Vavra (2002: 3) points out that traditional grammar focuses on
categorizing words, not sentences. Let us consider the following:
26
(1) The eggs were scrambled.
(2) Eggs scrambled by his mother were just right.
(3) Paul likes scrambled eggs.
Different grammatical theories have different ways of explaining
‘scrambled’, and the discussion can become very complex. In (3)
‘scrambled’ is considered a simple adjective. The answer which Vavra
gives depends on how one learns the word.
Greever and Jones (1939: 88) define an adjective as a “word or
expression used to describe or limit the meaning of another word”.
A general definition posed by Millet (2003: 3) is that an adjective
is “a word describing (or qualifying) a noun”: Purple patches, a
handsome husband. Some adjectives are inflected to indicate a
comparative and superlative degree, e.g.
(4) David is stronger than Peter.
(5) Mama says that she was then the prettiest, silliest, most affected
husband-hunting butterfly she ever remembers.
Most adjectives can be used either attributively as in (6) or
predicatively as in (7):
(6) The green hat is nice.
(7) The hat is green.
(Eagles, 2000: 7)
After this bird-eye view, one can represent the traditionalists’
view by the following table:
27
Table (1): Traditionalist’s Model.
Superlative
Descriptive
Strongest
The tall man…
Limiting
Comparative
Stronger
These two houses
Base
Predicate
The boy is clever
Semantic
Strong
Postpositive
Morphological
Attorney general…
Attributive
Syntactic
The clever boy…
Adjective
Example
Type of
Title
2.1.1.2. Adjectives in Structural Grammar:
Although structuralists concentrate mainly on form and
structure as a basis for their classification of the adjectives, they
treat meaning as “it should be consulted after there has been a
thorough analysis of form and structure” (Bornstein 1976: 111).
The following table is illustrative:
Table (2): Structuralist’s Model.
28
L
D
A
et
d
T
e
j
i
r
e
t
m
c
l
i
t
e
n
i
e
v
r
e
i
n
k
N
i
o
n
u
g
n
v
e
r
b
I
n
A
t
d
e
j
n
e
s
c
i
t
f
i
i
v
e
e
r
E
T
o
m
s
v
t
x
h
l
a
m
e
i
a
e
d
n
e
r
r
e
y
e
m
p
d
l
e
Structural grammar looks at the order of how things are put
together. It is the use of vocabulary and syntax. It attempts to describe the
ways the words can be put together in formed sentences. This approach to
grammar describes where the nouns should be placed in the sentences
rather than their definition. In essence, structural grammar is the structure
of how the sentence and other constructions are put together.
Structuralists are in favour of formal grammatical hypothesis. They
believe that adjective ordering is a matter of formal order subclasses of
the order class of adjectives.
d
29
2.1.1.3. Adjectives in Transformational Generative Grammar:
Transformationalits
believed
that
there
is
an
underlying system of understanding language; all languages
starts are inside. They believe that a language is deep inside us.
It is innate and universal. These rules take a sentence with
grammatical structure and turn it into a sentence with a
different grammatical structure, but it still has the same
meaning. As a result, Chomsky’s work (1957) has been highly
controversial, rekindling the age-old debate over whether
language is universal and innate.
Fowler (1971: 18) states that transformationalists are
responsible for the arrangement of words in surface structure.
They
are
responsible
for combining units in various ways that the whole apparatus of
‘subordination’
familiar
in
traditional
grammar
transformationally managed. The examples are illustrative.
(1) a. The black cat sat on the mat.
b. The cat which was black sat on the mat.
c. The cat sat on the mat. The cat was black.
is
30
Transformationalists attempt to define the correlations
between
formal-semantic
classes
and
transformational
operations. For instance, Lord (1970) who asserts that
adjectives which precede a head noun normally succeed each
other in the order of transformational investment. This means
that the simpler the derivation is, the earlier the adjective is
ordered in the sequence.
2.1.2. Characteristics of Adjectives:
We cannot decide whether a word is an adjective or not,
if we look at it in isolation, because the form of the word does
not necessarily indicate its syntactic function. The following
examples are illustrative.
(1)
a. A round of golf.
(noun)
b. They round the corner.
(verb)
c. A round object.
(adjective)
d. He comes round to see us.
(adverb)
In discussing suffixes of the adjectives. Brown et al
(1958: 89) state that the grammatical form of an adjective is not
easy to describe, because it has so few of major devices that are
most easily understood-such as the simple inflectional tags or
functional words that clearly mark some other parts of speech.
Fortunately, however, adjectives do have a large group of
relatively distinct permanent forms.
31
Canny et al (2002: 4) specify the common word endings
of adjectives. They are:
(1)
‘-ive’ at the end of a word means doing or tending toward doing
some action. e.g.
extensive
(2) ‘-en’ at the end of a word means made of something; e.g.
wooden.
(3)‘-ic’ at the end of a word means characteristic of something;
like something; e.g.
heroic
(4) ‘-al’ sometimes makes an adjective; when it makes an adjective it
means relating to; e.g.
financial
(5) ‘-able’ at the end of a word means able ___; can; or giving ___; e.g.
portable
(6) ‘-y’ at the end of a word means having _____; e.g.
hairy
(7) ‘-ous’ at the end of a word means full of _____; having ____; e.g.
mysterious
(8) ‘-ful’ at the end of a word means full of ____; having ____; e.g.
hopeful
(9) ‘-less’ at the end of a word means without e.g.
powerless
32
So suffixes are common markers of adjectives. They serve as
identifying signals to the reader or listener so that his response
may be appropriate, however, not all of these suffixes are
enough in themselves to identify adjectives, since some are
characteristics also of nouns (e.g., survival) and some of
adverbs.
Quirk et al (1985: 402-403) suggest four features which
are commonly considered to be characteristics of most
adjectives:
(1)
They can freely occur in attributive function, e.g.
An ugly painting.
(2)
They can freely occur in predicative function, e.g.
a. The painting is ugly.
(subject complement)
b. He thought the painting ugly.
(object complement)
(3) They can be premodified by the intensifier very, e.g.
The children are very happy.
(4) They take comparative and superlative forms, e.g.
strong, stronger, strongest.
33
In discussing the characteristics of the adjectives, Warren
(1984: 93) says that the gradability of an adjective is reflected
in its ability to express comparison (cheaper, cheapest; more
important; most important) and its ability to be intensified (very
cheap) or attenuated (not very important, less impressing).
(for further detail, see R. Long and D. Long, 1971: 383-388).
Though gradability is a semantic feature of adjectives, Chalker
(1984: 164) argues that some adjectives cannot be so graded.
Ungradable adjectives include:
(a) attributive adjectives.
(former,
outright
chemical, etc)
(b) nationality adjectives.
(English, Scottish,
French, etc.)
(c) adjectives with an absolute meaning. (alternative, overage,
equal, etc.)
2.1.2.1. Adjectives as Modifiers:
Another means of identifying the adjective is its position in the
noun phrase, the adjective comes before the noun-usually between a
determiner and noun, e.g.
(1) The old lady.
Sometimes, adjective modifier comes after the noun, especially in
poetry and in prose in which the writer is trying to create a particular
stylistic effect, e.g.
(2) This is the forest primeval.
(Collins, 1990: 113-114)
34
2.1.2.2 Adjectives and Other Modifiers:
Collins (1990: 101-104) states that the use of noun modifiers in
English is very common indeed. In fact, when the context makes it clear
what one means, noun can be used almost to modify any other noun.
Modifiers can be used to indicate a wide range of relationships between
the two nouns. For example one can say what something is made of as in
‘cotton socks’. The use of noun modifiers is a productive feature of
English.
As mentioned already modifiers give more information about the
person or thing one is talking about rather than just giving their general or
specific name.
Anything which is put before a noun is called modifier. Anything
which one puts after a noun is called qualifier. Most adjectives are used
as modifiers, e.g.
(1) A big city.
Nouns also can be used as modifiers, e.g.
(2) He opened the car door.
Francis (1954: 321-322) remarks that a few verbs may function as
adjective-modifiers. In such cases the verb is either in the presentparticiple inflection preceding the adjective head or in the infinitive form
following the adjective-head, e.g.
(3) a. Easy to say.
b. Hard to get.
35
On rare occasions adjectives may be modified by other
adjectives, e.g.
(4) Icy cold.
Roberts (1964: 236) states that nouns, along with verbs, adverbs,
and adjectives can be modifiers of a noun. The transformations that make
nouns modifiers of other nouns are more complex than those for other
word classes. He (1964: 238) adds that when an adjective and a noun are
used together as noun modifiers, the adjective comes first and the noun
second.
Hill (1958: 176) classifies prenominal modifiers by the criteria of
order classes and stress patterns. He numbers the groups of prenominal
modifiers by the ‘distance’ from the head noun, e.g.
(5) All the ten fine old stone houses.
Further, he states that when an adjective comes in front of two nouns, it is
usually obvious whether it is modifying the two nouns combined or only
the noun modifier. Examples:
(6) An electric can opener.
(7) An electric shock treatment.
(for further detail, see Warren, 1984: 181-184).
36
2.1.2.3. Central and Peripheral Adjectives:
According to Quirk et al (1985: 403-404) not all words that are
traditionally regarded as adjectives possess all of these four features:
(a) attributive use.
(b) predicative use after the copula ‘seem’.
(c) premodification by ‘very’.
(d) comparison.
Adjectives are analysed in respect to these four features
mentioned. In the following table the first six words are regarded as
adjectives, whereas ‘soon’ and ‘abroad’, at the bottom of the table, are
assigned to the adverb class:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
[1] hungry
+
+
+
+
[2] infinite
+
+
–
–
[3] old
+
–
+
+
[4] afraid
?
+
+
+
[5] utter
+
–
–
–
[6] asleep
–
+
–
–
Central
Adjective
peripheral
[7] soon
[8] abroad
So the ability of functioning both attributively and predicatively is to be a
central feature of adjectives. Words like ‘hungry’ and ‘infinite’, which
satisfy both criteria (a and b), are; therefore, called central adjectives.
Words like ‘old’, ‘afraid’, ‘utter’, and ‘asleep’, which satisfy at least
one of these first two criteria (a or b), are called peripheral adjectives.
Examples:
37
(1)
John is hungry.
(central)
(2) The universe is infinite.
(3) Susan is an old friend.
(4) The prisoners were afraid.
(peripheral)
(5) Bob is an utter fool.
(6) The patient was asleep.
2.1.2.4. Adjectives and Participles:
Both present participle (-ing) and past participle (-ed) can be
used as adjectives. Present participle adjectives, amusing, boring, tiring,
etc., are active. They mean having these effects. Past participle adjectives
amused, horrified, tired etc., are possessive. They mean ‘affected in this
way’.
(1) The work was tiring.
(The workers were soon tired)
(2) An infuriated woman.
(Thomson and Martinet, 1960: 33)
Collins (1990: 79-80) points out that a large number of English
adjectives end in (-ed). Many are of the same form as the past participle
of verb. Others are formed by adding (-ed) to a noun. Others are closely
related to any other words, e.g.
38
(3) A disappointed man.
Like other adjectives, participial adjectives can usually be
modified by very, extremely, or less (very determined, extremely selfcentered, less frightening, etc.). They can also take more or most to form
comparatives and superlatives (annoying, more annoying, most
annoying). Finally most participial adjectives can be used both
attributively and predicatively. Examples:
(4) a. This is an irritating noise.
b. That noise is irritating.
2.1.3. Nouns Functioning as Adjectives:
It is commonplace for a noun to function as an
adjective, which modifies another noun or pronoun. Nouns
functioning as adjectives are called noun – adjectives or
attributive. A noun-adjective modifies or describes another
noun or pronoun in the sentence by qualifying the noun or
pronoun. The noun-adjective qualifies the noun or pronoun by
answering ‘Which one’? ‘What kind of’? or ‘How many’?
Examples:
(1) The black cat sits on the fence.
(Which cat? The black
cat)
(2) Soft apples are rotten to the core.
(What kind of apples?
Soft apples)
(3) Twelve ducks swam past us.
ducks)
(Armchair, 2002: 7)
(How many ducks? Twelve
39
Any noun in English can be used to describe any other noun.
The noun – as – adjective comes in front of the noun which it
describes:
(4) He did not buy an expensive typewriter cover.
(Feigenbaum, 1985: 157)
The adjective ‘expensive’ and the noun ‘typewriter’ describe
the noun ‘cover’ they provide information about ‘what kind’.
But Morsberger (1965: 139-141) suggests that even those are
not exclusive; we can find words with some of these endings
serving as other parts of speech, e.g.
(5) Martin and Criminal.
In (5) ‘Martin’ and ‘Criminal’ can be used either as adjectives
or nouns. When a word that can be a noun, i.e., that can serve
as the subject of a verb) functions as an adjective, it can in turn
be modified by an adjective, e.g.
(6) A grammar textbook.
In (6) the noun ‘grammar’ is an adjective modifying
‘textbook’, yet ‘grammar’ may be modified by an adjective,
e.g.
(7) An English grammar textbook.
And we can even add an adjective to modify ‘English’ as in:
(8) An old English grammar textbook.
40
Low (1966: 209) says that many common and a few
proper and abstract nouns may be used as adjectives to qualify
other nouns a dream world; a sea story; a north sea port; a
crime reporter. On the other hand, Humphreys (1945: 60) says
sometimes a word that is usually used as a noun functions as
adjective: e.g.; the hen-bird, summer sun; these words,
although normally used as nouns, are here qualifying words and
are, therefore, adjectives.
2.2. Syntactic Classification of Adjectives:
The major syntactic functions of adjectives are attributive and
predicative. Since a word that cannot function either attributively or
predicatively is not recognized as an adjective; Eagles (2003: 7) claims
that adjectives can appear in attributive position, as noun modifiers, or
predicative position as a complement of a verb like ‘be’,
‘seem’,
‘consider’, etc; that the attributive and predicative positions are the major
ones for single-word adjectives, for the vast majority of them will be
found in these places. Adjectives can be used attributively when they
qualify a noun, e.g.
(1) Henry is an honest, hardworking boy.
Adjectives are used predicatively when they form the predicate with verb
to “be” or other verbs of incomplete predictions, e.g.
(2) The house is new.
41
Adjectives whether predicative or attributive are invariable for number,
gender, person or case (C. Eckersley and J. Eckersley 1960: 65).
To illuminate the difference between attributive and predicative
adjectives, Sevenonius (2003: 3) points out that there are numerous
reasons to distinguish predication from modification, e.g.
(3) a. That’s my old neighbour / lover / office / sergeant.
b. My neighbour / lover / office-mate / sergeant is old.
(a) means the neighbourhood is old.
(b) means that my neighbour is old. ‘Old’ is a reference to his ‘age’
Likewise Shoebottom (2004: 3) shows that there are a number of
difficulties that English adjectives can cause, even to the more advanced
learners of the language. Let us consider the following:
(4) The big house.
(5) The house is big.
This simply means that we can use adjectives both attributively and
predicatively. However many adjectives cannot be used attributively.
Examples:
(6) The girl is asleep.
(7) *The asleep girl.
Similarly, Christophersen and Sandved (1969: 133) say that
‘sorry’ is used attributively normally to mean something like ‘sad’,
‘wretched’ or ‘worthless’:
(8) It was a sorry sight.
When it is used predicatively it normally means ‘regretful’:
(9) I’m very sorry.
42
Thomson and Martinet (1960: 34) point out that some adjectives
can be used only attributively or only predicatively, and some can change
their meaning when moved from one position to the other, ‘bad’ / ‘good’,
‘big’ / ‘small’, ‘heavy’ / ‘light’ and ‘old’, used in such expressions as
‘bad sailor’, ‘good swimmer’, ‘light sleeper’, etc. cannot be used
predicatively without changing the meaning: ‘a small farmer’ is a man
who has a small farm, but ‘the farmer is small’ means that he is a small
man physically.
(for a similar view, see also Quirk et al, 1972: 246-248; 1985: 416-417;
Chalker, 1984: 162; McArthar, 1992: 1-5).
2.2.1. Attributive Adjectives:
Adjectives which appear directly beside the noun, most commonly
before it are called attributive, because they attribute a quality to the noun
they modify as in the following:
(1) He washed the empty cup.
(2) The chatter made the room noisy.
‘Empty’ in (1) is an attributive adjective, as it is placed beside the
noun ‘cup’. It is describing the cup.
Noisy in (2) is an attributive adjective, though it appears directly
after the noun. ‘Noisy’ is describing the room (University of Calgary
Bulletin, 1998: 6).
43
Then attributive adjectives can be both postnominal and
prenominal as in (3) and (4), even if the postnominal position is less
common in English. But there are restrictions as far as some adjectives
are concerned. An adjective like ‘former’ cannot be postnominal and
some adjectives appear only after the noun. Examples:
(3) Navigable rivers, rivers navigable
(4) Former architect, * architect former.
(Eagles, 2003: 7)
Brown et al. (1958: 94) affirm that when the single word adjective
is in the attributive position, no grammatical device may come between
the adjective and the noun it modifies-not an indicator, not a conjunction,
nor any kind of punctuation. The only place for indicator is before the
adjective: the large screen, a thick all, this bad example, etc.
The device of placing a word in the attributive position is by far the
most common way of showing that it is an adjective. The description of
the single word order adjective in this important word order pattern may
be clarified by means of diagrams. Here, we have four possible patterns
for the adjective noun phrase:
(5) The peace treaty: (indicator)
adj. sing. noun
(6) Those famous books: (indicator)
adj. pl. nouns
(7) The great man’s: (indicator)
adj. gen. sing. noun’s
(8) The little boys’: (indicator)
adj. gen. pl. nouns’
44
They in (1958: 95) remark that any word that satisfies the following
conditions is an attributive adjective:
1.
It must be followed by a noun.
2. The intended meaning of the sentence must not allow any grammatical
device (an indicator, a function word, or a punctuation mark) to come
between this word and the word that follows.
Murcia and Freeman (1983: 390) affirm that not all attributive
adjectives can be derived from predicate adjectives. Many adjectives are
always attributive, never predicative as in the following:
(9) The main reason.
(10) *The reason is main.
Any adjectives permit special meanings to occur in attributive
position that can’t be paraphrased with a predicate use of the same
adjective. Examples:
(11) An angry storm.
(12) *The storm was angry.
Bolinger (1972) suggests that sometimes an adverbial source is
more reasonable for some attributive adjectives than for a predicate
adjective, e.g.
45
(13) The daily newspaper – the newspaper appears daily.
On the other hand, Quirk et al (1985: 428) point out that adjectives
restricted to attributive position, or these occurring predominantly in
attributive position, do not characterize the referent of the noun directly.
Let us consider the following examples:
(14) a. That old man.
b. An old friend of mine.
c. My friend is old.
‘Old’ in (14a) is a central adjective and can thus also be predicative:
(15) That man is old.
while ‘old’ in (14 b) is restricted to attributive position (a long – standing
friend) and cannot be related to (c). In this case ‘old’ is opposite of new
(recently acquired: it is his friendship that is old).
A few qualitative adjectives are only used attributively such as
‘adoring’, ‘commanding’, ‘knotty’, ‘fateful’ etc, and most adjectives
which can only be used attributively are classifying adjectives such as
‘atomic’, ‘north’, ‘western’, ‘woollen’, etc; (see Collins, 1990: 71).
Warren (1984) points that premodifying adjectives may ‘identify’,
‘classify’ or ‘describe’. Examples:
(16) I saw some polar bears at the zoo.
(classifier)
(17) Give me the red book.
(identifier)
(18) I saw some cuddly teddies.
(descriptor)
46
Over the last four or so decades, there have been sporadic attempts
at accounting for the functions of attributive adjectives. Yet Kullenberg
(2003: 1) points out that Warren’s Classifying Adjectives (1984) is one of
the most thorough and exhaustive studies in which it is suggested that
premodifying adjectives may ‘identify’, ‘classify’, or ‘describe’, yet
Kullenberg (2003: 1) adds fourth function, which she calls ‘stipulation’.
In this function the speaker uses the adjective to tell the addressee what
something should be like in order for the utterance to be applied to it. She
adds that in discourse, attributive adjectives function simultaneously on
two different functional levels. On the conceptual level, we find, for
instance, elaboration and classification, and on the communicative level,
we have description, identification and stipulation. Conceptual functions
are functions of the adjectives ‘as such’, whereas communicative
functions are the communicative uses to which the adjectives are put by
the speaker. Examples:
(19) Which bear did you like best? The polar bear.
Conceptual function: classification.
Communicative function: Identification.
(20) I saw a polar bear at the zoo today.
Conceptual function: Classification
Communication function: Description.
(21) They need a polar bear for the zoo.
Conceptual function: Classification.
Communicative function: Stipulation.
47
Chalker (1984: 185) says that in general, adjectives that appear only
in attributive position are less adjective-like than descriptive adjectives:
(a) Some relate to noun ‘someone’/‘something’ else. (former)
(b) Some are like intensifying or limiting adverbs. (utter, chief)
(c) Some are noun-related.
(chemical, coastal)
(d) Some overlap with adverbs.
(indoor, indoors adv.)
Attributive-only does not mean that the adjective cannot occur in a noun
phrase in the predication of sentence, e.g.
(22) What you say is utter nonsense.
And this means that such adjectives cannot stand without a noun, e.g.
(23) This nonsense is utter.
Murcia and Freeman (1983: 393) give a separate source for
attributive adjectives:
1. These adjectives that show the reference of the head noun has already
been determined, e.g.
very
The
same
man I was seeking.
exact
2. Those adjectives that show us the importance or rank of the head noun:
main
Their
prime
faults.
chief
3. Those adjectives that show the head noun is recognized by law or
custom:
lawful
48
The
legal
heir
true
4. Those adjectives which identify the reference of the noun itself, i.e.,
tell us what the noun means, and which may not occur, after the
copula be. Examples:
A medical doctor.
*A doctor (who) is medical.
5. Those adjectives that qualify the time reference of the noun, e.g.
The future king.
6. Those adjectives that qualify the geographical reference of the noun,
e.g.
The urban crisis.
7. Those adjectives that intensify the head noun, e.g.
A total stranger.
8. Those adjectives that show the uniqueness of the head noun, e.g.
The sole survivor.
The most common types of attributive adjectives are pointed out by
Quirk et al, (1985: 428-432). They are as follows:
1. Intensifying Adjectives:
There are three semantic subclasses of intensifying adjectives that
can be distinguished.
(a) Emphasizers have a general heightening effect and are generally
attributive only, e.g.
49
A true scholar.
(b) Amplifiers scale upwards from an assumed norm and are central
adjectives if they are inherent and denote a high or extreme degree
e.g.
A complete victory ~ the victory was complete.
They may also be non-inherent and confined to the attributive
position; e.g.
Absolute truth.
(c) Downtoners have a lowering effect, usually scaling down words from
an assumed norm; they are relatively few, e.g.
A slight effort.
2. Restrictive Adjectives:
Restrictive adjectives restrict the reference of the noun exclusively,
particularly, or mainly, e.g.
The main reason.
3. Adjectives Related to Adverbs:
Some noninherent adjectives that are attributive only can be related
to adverbs, but do not always fall within the intensifying or restrictive
types of adjectives, e.g.
A possible friend (possibly a friend).
50
4. Adjectives Related to Nouns:
These adjectives are derived from nouns and are restricted to
attributive position, e.g.
A criminal lawyer (a lawyer practising criminal law).
5. Adjectives Related to Adverbials:
Some adjectives that are attributive only can be related to
adverbials, but do not fall within the two types that have been discussed:
My former friend ~ formerly my friend.
If the adjectives premodify genitive nouns, the latter suggest a
relationship to the verb base or to an associated verb:
‘A hard worker’ means someone who works hard.
6. Denominal Adjectives:
Some adjectives derived from nouns are restricted to attributive
position only:
‘An atomic scientist’ means who specialized in atomic science.
2.2.2. Predicative Adjectives:
Adjectives which appear after a linking verb are called predicative,
because they form part of the predicate. They modify the subject of the
sentence or clause. Examples:
(1) The painting was colourful.
(2) The wind remains strong.
51
A predicative position is normally known as:
much
The car/man (etc.) is very
-----------
quite
Brown et al. (1958: 100) say that because of the similarity in form,
predicate adjectives may be confused with nouns (either predicate nouns
or direct objects) that may also appear after some of these verbs. This
confusion is most likely when the noun is uninflected as in the following:
(3) She smells smoke.
(noun object: after transitive verb)
(4) She smells sweet.
(predicate adjective: after linking verb)
Low (1966: 212) agrees that adjectives separated by the verb
from the noun or pronoun they qualify are used predicatively. Some
adjectives can be used only predicatively. These include: ‘alive’;
‘asleep’; ‘awake’; ‘ajar’; ‘alone’. Corresponding epithets to the first two
are: ‘living”; ‘sleeping’. There is no exact epithet for the other three:
(5) The mother, who was awake.
(6) The door which was ajar.
(7) The child, who was alone in the house.
McArthur (1992: 1) defines predicative adjective as “an
adjective that occurs in the predicate”, e.g.
(8) Eliot remained happy.
(subject complement)
(9) He made Linda happy.
(object complement)
Some adjectives can only be used predicatively: asleep
52
(10) The children were asleep.
(11) *The asleep children.
Increasingly commonly, the term predicative adjective is used to refer
only to such adjectives, in contrast to attributive adjective. Chalker (1984:
167-168) classifies adjectives which are used attributively into three
parts. They are as follows:
1. A-Series:
All the words in this series can fit into the slot after linking verbs,
but some are more adjective-like and some are more adverb-like than
others.
(12) Try to keep afloat.
A-Series:
Afloat, afraid, aghast agog, akin,
(13) The child is afraid of the dog.
alert, alight, alive, alone, aloof,
amenable, amiss, asleep., ashamed,
averse, awake, aware, awash
2. Health Adjectives:
Strictly speaking those works in the next table should not be
included in this table, except the word ‘poorly’. They can all appear
attributively – at least in American English, but as attributive adjectives
in British English,
(14) A fine man.
(15)
A better person.
They do not refer to the health.
Usage is complicated:
(a)
In British English all these words are only predicative.
53
(b)
Predicative ‘sick’ means different things in British and American
English.
Health Adjectives:
I feel faint / fine / ill/ poorly / well /
faint, ill, poorly, well, unwell
unwell / better
3. Adjectives with Complementation:
On the whole, adjectives with complementation do not precede a
noun, so any adjective that obligatorily takes complementation is likely to
be predicative only (or possibly in post-position).
Adjectives used with (16) He is bound to loose his moneyhe always does.
complementation:
Answerable, bound, conductive (17) I am perfectly content to stay at
content,
devoid,
indebted,
home.
inclined, liable, both, opposed,
prone, subject, tantamount.
Morsberger (1965: 139) points out that predicate adjectives are
used as both complement and modifier. Usually they come after a linking
verb. For emphasis, (usually in poetry) the predicate adjective may come
first. Examples
(18) That camel is dignified.
(19) Black is the colour of my true love’s hair.
(for a similar view, see also House and Harman, 1931: 82; C. Eckersley
and J. Eckersley, 1960: 64; Quirk et al, 1972: 263 – 264; 1985: 432-433;
and Weinhold, 2000: 4).
54
2.2.3. Postpositive Adjectives:
Postpositive adjectives occur after the nouns which they modify,
e.g.
(1) The governor general
Quirk et al (1985: 418) affirm that adjectives can sometimes be
postpositive, i.e. they can immediately follow the noun or pronoun they
modify. Let us consider the differences between (2), (3) and (4).
(2) This information is useful.
(predicative)
(3) Useful information.
(attributive)
(4) Something useful.
(postpositive)
A postpositive adjective can usually be regarded as a reduced relative
clause:
(5) Something that is useful.
They add that adjectives ending in (-able) and (-ible) can have
postposition when the noun is modified by another adjective in the
superlative degree, by ‘only’ or by the general ordinals ‘last’, ‘next’, etc.,
e.g.
(6) The greatest imaginable insult ~ the greatest insult imaginable.
Thus as in (6) we have either attributive position or postposition.
A postpositive adjective usually follows its noun, and, like the noun in
apposition, adds to its noun and explains it. The postpositive adjective
may be restrictive, e.g.
55
(7) A teacher untrained in phonetics is as useless as a doctor untrained
in anatomy.
Or it may be non restrictive as in:
(8) A blacksmith, swarthy and muscular, was leisurely working with the
long handle of his bellows.
(House and Harman, 1931: 82)
2.2.4. Adjectives as Head of Noun Phrases:
Quirk et al. (1985: 421-424) state that adjectives can function as
heads of noun phrases, which can be subject of the sentence, complement,
object, and prepositional complement. Adjectives are typically used as
heads of noun phrases to refer to certain fairly well-established classes of
persons, e.g.
(1) The brave.
There are three types of adjectives functioning as heads of noun phrases:
Type (a): The Innocent:
(2) The innocent are often deceived by the unscrupulous.
Adjectives which can premodify personal nouns can be noun
phrase heads with plural and generic reference denoting classes,
categories or types of people. The adjective can itself be premodified as
in (3) or postmodified as in (4). These adjectives are restricted to generic
reference and take plural concord. Hence the poor cannot denote one
56
person and can have either specific or generic reference. We must
distinguish the noun phrase from cases of textual ellipsis as in (5).
(3) The extremely old need great deal of attention.
(4) The young in spirit enjoy life.
(5) The Young student found the course difficult, the older found it easy.
Here, the older is an elliptical from the older students. The definite
determiner is normally the generic definite article ‘the’. However, the use
of the possessive determiner in:
(6) We will nurse your sick, cloth your naked, and feed your hungry.
Type (b): The Dutch:
(7) The industrious Dutch are admired by their neighbours.
Some adjectives denote nationalities can be noun phrase heads:
The adjectives in question are virtually restricted to words ending
in- sh and -ch: Danish, French.
Nationality adjectives are sometimes used not to refer to the notion
as a whole, but to some part of it, for example, ‘teams’ and ‘troops’ are
representing their country.
(8) The English lost against the Welsh in the final.
Type (c): The Mystical:
(9) She admires the mystical.
Some adjectives can function as noun-phrase heads with abstract
reference. They include, in particular, superlatives, in which case we can
sometimes insert a general noun like ‘thing’ in its abstract sense:
57
(10) The latest (thing/news) is that he is going to run for re-election.
Unlike types (a) and (b), type (c) adjectives functioning as noun-phrase
heads take singular concord:
(11) The best thing is yet to come.
They can be modified by adverbs:
(12) The very best thing is yet to come.
Such adjective phrases need not to be dependent on any previous
linguistic context, but may be a comment on some object or activity in the
situational context.
2.3. Semantic Classification of Adjectives:
2.3.1. Stative/Dynamic:
The term stative means ‘a term used in grammatical classification
referring to one of two main aspectual categories of verb use, the other
being dynamic’ (Crystal, 1985: 287).
Like verbs, adjectives may be divided into a dynamic and a stative
subclass, whereas, verbs are typically dynamic, adjectives are typically
stative. ‘Tall’ is a stative adjective in (1) and ‘careful’ is dynamic
adjective in (2).
(1) Jill is tall.
(2) Jim is being careful.
(Jackson, 1982: 63)
58
Quirk et al (1972: 265) affirm that adjectives are characteristically
stative. Many adjectives, however, can be seen as dynamic. Adjectives
that can be used dynamically include a limited number such as,
‘abusive’, ‘adorable’, ‘ambitious’, etc.
2.3.2. Gradable/Non-Gradable:
Chalker (1984: 164) says that the reason why some adjectives do
not have inflected forms, and are not preceded by ‘very’, is connected
with gradability. This is a distinction based on meaning. Most adjectives
can be seen on a scale of intensity: ‘old’, ‘older’, ‘oldest’/ ‘beautiful’,
‘more beautiful’, ‘most beautiful’/ quite/ very/ extremely old.
On the other hand, other adjectives cannot be so graded. Ungradable
adjectives include:
(a) Attributive-only adjectives (former, outright, chemical, etc.)
(b) Nationality adjectives (English, Scottish, French, etc.) in their
primary sense.
(c) Adjectives with an absolute meaning (alternative, average, equal, etc.)
59
2.3.3. Inherent/Non-Inherent:
Jackson (1982: 63) says that Inherent adjectives, which are the
majority, characterize the referent of the noun directly:
(1) A wooden chair.
Non-inherent adjectives, or non-inherent uses of adjectives do not exhibit
a direct characterization of the noun:
(2) A wooden actor.
In this case the actor is not made of wood. On the other hand, Grammar
of English (1998: 3) affirm that most attributive adjectives denote some
attribute of the noun which modifies, the phrase a red car may be said to
denote a car which is red. In fact most adjective-noun sequences such as
this can be reformulated in a similar way:
(3) An old man. (A man who is old)
(inherent)
(4) An old friend. (The friendship is old)
(non-inherent)
2.4. Adjective Ordering in English:
2.4.1. Syntactic Ordering of Adjectives:
Grammarians believe that adjectives can be ordered either
syntactically or semantically or both. Among those who adopted the
syntactic order are Bloomfield (1933), Krapp (1948) and others like
House and Harman (1931), Hornby (1976), and MacFadyen (1994). In
what follows, we will present their views in some detail.
60
2.4.1.1. Bloomfield’s View:
Bloomfied (1933: 202-203) divides adjectives in English into two
types: (1) limiting adjectives which limit or specify the nouns, and (2)
descriptive adjectives which describe the quality of nouns. However,
limiting adjectives can be subdivided into: (1) determiners, and (2)
numeratives. His view can be represented by the following table
Table (3): Bloomfield’s Model.
No. of
Ordering
1.
2.
Type of Adjective
limiting
Function
Examples
determiners
they limit or specify the house
numeratives
the noun
they describe the
descriptive
quality of the noun
one house
a great house
2.4.1.2. Krapp’s View:
Krapp (1948: 101) divides adjectives into three types: (1) descriptive, (2)
quantitative, and (3) proper. His view can be represented by the following
table:
Table (4): Krapp’s Model.
No. of
Ordering
Type of Adjective
1.
descriptive
2.
quantitative
Function
adding details to the noun
specifying the quantity of the
noun
Examples
the tall man
some sugar
61
3.
proper
specifying the official name English
of a person, place, thing.
literature
2.4.1.3. Others’ View:
Some grammarians like House and Harman (1931), Hornby (1976),
and MacFadyen (1994), divide adjectives on the basis of limiting
or specifying the nouns. This classification will be explained in some
detail:
2.4.1.3.1. Distributive Adjectives:
Words like ‘each’, ‘every’, ‘both’, ‘neither’ and ‘either’ are used
as distributive adjectives. Examples:
(1) Each man must do his best.
(2) Every man must do his best.
(3) Both his legs were broken in the accident.
(4) I have travelled by the 11.30 train and the 12.5 train and neither train
had a restaurant car.
(5) There is a train at 11.30 and one at 12.5 either train will get you to
Oxford in time for the meeting.
(for a similar view, see also House and Harman, 1931: 64; Hornby, 1976:
110; and MacFadyen, 1994: 92; Bakir, 1995: 83; Al-Halawachy, 1999:
15).
62
2.4.1.3.2. Indefinite Adjectives:
House and Harman (1931: 68) point out that the indefinites may
include adjective pronoun denoting indefinite meaning ‘few’, ‘some’,
‘any’, ‘much’, ‘enough’, etc.
Most adjectives which name the quality or the quantity of
substance or designate the number of objects can substitute for nouns, and
are classified variously in our school grammars; as indefinite pronouns,
indefinite nouns, indefinite adjective, etc.
The distinction between the uses of the same word as adjective and
as adjective pronoun may be seen in (1) and (2).
(1) Some books are to be tested.
(adjective)
(2) Some are born great.
(pronoun)
They (1931: 75) further add that indefinite adjectives may suggest
indefiniteness of quantity or number:
(3) Some people.
(4) Some time.
Many of these have prenominal function and when so used are called
indefinite adjective pronouns.
(5) Some of my people.
(6) Much of our effort.
63
Some indefinite adjectives do not have prenominal use (e.g., alone, else,
every, no, only, etc.), and are therefore, never used except when they
qualify nouns. When indefinite pronouns – such as something, someone,
anybody – are modified by an adjective, the adjective comes after the
pronoun, e.g.
(7) Anyone capable of doing something horrible to someone nice
should be punished.
(for the same view, see also Hornby, 1976: 111; and MacFadyen,
1994: 92)
2.4.1.3.3. Demonstratives and Articles:
House and Harman (1931: 67) say that ‘this’ and ‘that’ and their
plurals, ‘these’ and ‘those’ are demonstrative adjectives when they
modify nouns as in the following:
(1) This book is mine.
(2) These books are mine.
But they are demonstrative pronouns when they stand for nouns as in the
following:
(3) This is my book.
(4) These are your books.
64
The demonstratives ‘this’ and ‘these’ are used to designate or point out
some definite person, place, or thing referred to or intended. Likewise,
MacFadyen (1994: 2 of 5) shows that the demonstrative adjectives ‘this’,
‘these’, ‘that’, ‘those’ and ‘what’ are identical to the demonstrative
pronouns, but are used as adjectives to modify nouns or noun phrases:
(5) When the librarian tripped over that cord, she dropped
a pile of books.
In (5) the demonstrative adjective “that” modifies the noun ‘cord’ and the
noun phrase ‘that cord’ is the object of the preposition ‘over’.
However, we are not in respect of making a kind of contrast
between English and Arabic demonstratives, but Arabic demonstratives
are entity-terms, defined in their own nature, and capable of standing
alone.
As for articles, they specified the reference of the noun whether it
is specific (definite/ indefinite), generic or unique. Examples:
1. A young lady.
(specific indefinite)
2. The black bag.
(specific definite)
3. A horse is faster than a donkey.
(generic)
4. The sun rises in the east.
(unique reference)
65
2.4.1.3.4. Possessive Adjectives:
MacFadyen (1994: 5) shows that possessive adjectives, (e.g. ‘my’,
‘your’, ‘his’, ‘her’, ‘its’, ‘our’, ‘their’) are similar to possessive
pronouns; however, they are used as adjectives and modify nouns or noun
phrases, e.g.
(1) I can’t complete my assignment because I don’t have the textbook.
In (1) the possessive adjective ‘my’ modifies ‘assignment’ and the noun
phrase my ‘assignment’ functions as an object.
(for a similar view, see also Hornby, 1976: 111)
2.4.1.3.5. Ordinal and Cardinal Adjectives:
House and Harman (1931: 74) claim that the definite numerals are
cardinals, ordinals and multiplicatives. The cardinals are the primary, or
counting numbers, answering the question How many? one, two, three,
twenty-five, etc. The ordinals indicate the serial order, position in rank, of
individual persons, objects, or ideas, answering the question which one of
the list or group? First, second, twenty-fifth, etc. The multiplicatives
indicate how often the object is repeated, e.g., triple, double, etc.
On the other hand, MacFadyen (1994: 117-119) says that cardinal
numbers can be used as a part of compound adjective. The cardinal
number is used in front of a noun to form a compound adjective which is
usually hyphenated, e.g.
(1) He took out a five-dollar bill.
66
Cardinal numbers can also be used with general time words as modifiers
of adjectives, e.g.
(2) She was four months pregnant.
Adjectives that modify a noun by numbering (stating how many) are
cardinal adjectives as in the following:
(3) Five books.
(4) He had exactly thirty dollars in his pocket.
An ordinal adjective indicates the position of a noun in a series as in the
following:
(5) The first date.
2.4.1.3.6. Proper Adjectives:
These adjectives come from proper nouns (official names of a
particular person, place, name, or thing):
France/French, Shakespeare/Shakespearean
(1) Although he was born in Germany, he could not speak German.
Proper adjectives apply to one particular member of a class, rather
than to the class as a whole. Proper adjectives derived from proper nouns
are often used to modify. Examples:
(2) English literature.
Proper adjectives and proper nouns or words derived from proper nouns
used to describe or define substantives as in the following:
(3) New York styles.
67
2.4.2. Semantic Ordering of Adjectives:
In this section, a number of semantic views on adjective ordering
will be reviewed. The studies that have been made available for us
include:
2.4.2.1. Sledd’s View:
Sledd (1959) speaks in terms of pre-determiner, determiner,
limiting adjectives, adverbial of degree, descriptive adjectives, noun
adjunct. His view can be represented by the following table:
Table (5): Sledd’s Model.
Predeterminer
Both (of)
Determiner (or
Limiting
Adverbial of
Descriptive
Noun
possessive)
adjective
degree
adjective
adjunct
John’s
two
extremely
fine
brick
2.4.2.2. Corder’s View
In discussing position and order of Adjectives Corder (1960: 49)
refers to the following:
1.
Adjectives usually go before the word they describe, e.g.
A red flag.
2.
If there are two or more adjectives describing a word, we put the
one with the most general or subjective meaning first and the most
specific and objective last, e.g.
A nice new carpet.
3.
If the adjectives are both equally exact, we put the shorter first, e.g.
Nominal
walls
68
A quiet intelligent boy.
Two adjectives are often joined by ‘and’ for greater emphasis, e.g.
4.
A dark and stormy night.
5.
Certain types of adjectives usually come immediately before the
word they describe, e.g.
(a)
Colours: a big red book.
(b)
Styles: a tall gothic building.
(c)
Nationality: a clever French girl.
(d)
Nouns used adjectively: a paper bag.
2.4.2.3. Crystal’s View:
Crystal (1971: 139) suggests the following order:
1.
Adjectives of age preceding adjectives of colour, e.g.
The old black car.
2.
Adjectives of size precede adjectives of age, e.g.
A big new building.
3.
These two classes mentioned above are followed by the adjectives
of nationality or material.
A small French vase.
Crystal’s pattern of ordering can be represented by using the
following table.
Table (6): Crystal’s Model.
Determinative
Other
Adjectives
Size
Age
Colour
Nationality
Material
Head
Those
expensive
large
new
red
English
wooden
chairs
69
2.4.2.4. Baily’s View:
Baily (1975) suggests (1) texts, (2) card-sorting, and (3) elicited
speech samples. The following adjective ordering can be deduced: (1)
determiners, e.g. the, a(n), (2) evaluative, e.g. poor, rich, (3) measurement
adjective, e.g. little, old, (4) colouration adjectives, e.g. red, blue, and (5)
material adjectives, plastic, wooden.
A quick look at this view, one can see she does not include a class
for shape adjectives. However, age adjectives are treated as measurement
adjectives. Her view can be represented by the following table:
Table (7): Baily’s Model.
Determiner Evaluative
An
Measurement
ugly
new
Colouration Material
brown
Head
(Noun)
wooden
statue
2.4.2.5. Svatko’s View:
Svatko (1979) cited in Murcia and Freeman (1983: 397-98) gives
the following order:
Table (8): Svatko’s Model.
Det.
Opinion
Size
Shape
An
ugly
big round
2.4.2.6. Swan’s View:
Condition
Age
Colour
Origin
Noun
chipped
old
blue
French
vase
Swan (1980: 19) affirms that adjectives premodifying a noun can
be arranged as follows.
1.
Purpose comes before the head of a noun phrase, e.g.
A large conference hall.
70
2.
Adjectives denoting material precede purpose adjectives, e.g.
A large brick conference hall.
3.
The third position is occupied by origin, e.g.
A British glass ash-tray.
4.
Position four is for colour adjectives, e.g.
A green British glass ash-tray.
These can be represented by the following table:
Table (9): Swan’s Model.
DetermInative
Temperature
& other
Adjectives
Shape
Size
Age
Colour
Origin
Material
Purpose
Head
Noun
A
nice
round
large
new
green
Spanish
wooden
tennis
racket
Size
Length
Height
Age
Shape
Deverbal
Denominal
Colour
Participle
Nationality
Provenance
Style
Denominal
long, ….etc.
tall, high, ….etc.
old, new, ….etc.
round
interesting, ….etc.
angry, ….etc.
blue, ….etc.
retired, sleeping, ….etc.
English, ….etc.
British
Gothic
medical, ….etc.
this
large, ….etc.
these
Downtoners
both the
feeble, ….etc.
all the
Amplifiers
some
absolute, entire, ….etc.
all
Emphasizers
Determinative
certainly, pure, ….etc.
5148
2.4.2.7. Quirk et al’s View:
Quirk et al (1985) hold the view that when a head has more than one modifier, one should follow the following
sequence:
Table (10): Quirk et al’s Model.
Zone I
Pre-Central
Intensifying Adjectives
Zone II
Central
Non-Derived
Derived
Zone III
Post-Central
Zone IV
Pre-Head
Head
Noun
52
2.4.2.8. Collins’s View:
Collins (1990: 63) classifies adjectives into different types. They
are as follows:
1. Qualitative Adjectives:
Qualitative adjectives is a large group of adjectives which identify
qualities which someone or something has. This group includes words
such as ‘happy’ and ‘intelligent’.
2. Classifying Adjectives:
Classifying adjectives is a large group of adjectives which identify
someone or something as a member of class such as ‘financial’ and
‘intellectual’.
3. Colour Adjectives:
Colour adjectives is a small group of adjectives which identify the
colour of something, red, green, etc.
4. Emphasizing Adjectives:
Emphasizing adjectives is a small group of adjectives which are
used to emphasize feeling about the person or thing talking about such as
‘absolute’ and ‘letter’.
5. Determiners:
Determiners are a small group of adjectives which are used to
make the reference more precise. They are of two types:
A.
Specific determiners which include demonstrative and possessive
adjectives.
B.
General determiners which include some, any, another, etc.
53
2.4.2.9. Colchester’s English Study Centre’s View:
The Colchester English Study Centre (1995: 1) suggests the
following order which can be represented by the following table:
Table (11): Colchester’s Model.
No. of
Ordering
Type of Adjective
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Value/opinion
Size
Age/Temperature
Shape
Colour
Origin
Material
Head (Noun)
Examples
delicious, lovely, charming.
small, huge, tiny.
old, hot, young.
round, square, rectangular
red, blonde, black
Swedish, Victorian, Chinese
plastic, wooden, silver
statue
2.4.2.10. The English Club’s View:
The English Club (1997: 1) proposes the following adjective
sequence:
A.
The general sequence is: opinion, fact. Examples:
A nice French car.
B.
The normal sequence for the ‘fact’ adjectives is: ‘size’, ‘age’,
‘shape’, ‘colour’, ‘material’, ‘nationality’, e.g.
A big, old, square, black, wooden Chinese table.
This view can be represented by the following table:
54
Table (12): The English Club’s Model.
Fact
Opinion
Size
Age
Shape
Colour
Material
Two
small old round
yellow
wax
beautiful
2.4.2.11. The English Language Centre’s View:
Nationality
Head
Thai
candles
The English Language Centre (1990) suggests eight kinds of
adjectives that are supposed to come before a noun. This view can be
represented by the following table:
Table (13): The English Language Centre’s Model.
No. of
Ordering
Type of
Adjectives
1
Opinion
2
Size
3
Age
4
Shape
5
Colour
6
Origin
7
Material
8
Purpose
Function
Examples
An opinion adjective explains what
you think about something (other
people may not agree with you)
A size adjective, of course, tells
you how big or small something is
An age adjective tells you how
young or old something or
someone
A shape adjective describes a shape
of something
A colour adjective, of course
describes the colour of something
An origin adjective describes where
something comes from
A material adjective describes what
something is made from
A purpose adjective describes what
something is used for these
adjectives often end with ‘-ing’
Silly, beautiful,
horrible, difficult
Large, tiny,
enormous, little.
Ancient, new,
young, old.
Square,
round,
flat, rectangular
Blue,
pink,
redish, grey
French,
Lunar,
American, Greek
Wooden, metal,
cotton, paper
Sleeping (as in
‘sleeping nag’)
55
2.4.2.12. Dixen’s View:
Dixen (1999 cited in Eagles, 2003: 7) suggests the following
sequence of adjectives: Dimension, physical property, speed, age, colour,
value, difficulty, qualification, human propensity and similarity. His view
can be represented by the following table:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
all/ some ….etc.
the/ thin ….etc.
my/ john’s ….etc.
best/ strongest….etc.
third/ fourth….etc.
six/ seven….etc.
good/ bad….etc.
big/ short….etc.
sick/ ill….etc.
fast/ quick….etc.
happy/ eager….etc.
new/ old….etc.
red/ black….etc.
English/ Arabic….etc.
sleeping/ dancing….etc.
beneficiary
Purpose
composition
Adjectival Modifiers
Origin
Colour
Age
Human propensity
Speed
Pre-Adjectival Modifiers
Physical property
Dimension
Value
Cardinal numbers
Ordinal numbers
Superlatives
Possessives
Determiners
Logical qualifiers
Type of Adjective
Title
Post-Adjectival
Modifiers
Any Noun
No
Example
5551
Table (14): Dixen’s Model.
Head
56
2.4.2.13. Driven’s View:
Driven (1999: 57-67) shows that in a structural approach, one can
detect five major categories of attributive adjectives. They are as follows:
A.
qualifying ones such as nice.
B.
descriptive ones such as large, round, old, and brown.
C.
participles such as carved.
D.
adjectives of provenance such as Chinese, and
E.
relational adjectives such as wooden:
These categories can be represented by the following table:
Table (15): Driven’s Model.
shape
age
colour
Participle
Provenance
Relational
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
A
nice
large
round
old
H (Noun)
size
Descriptive
Qualifying
Determiner
Adjectives
Examples
Type of Adj.
Title
Noun Phrase
10
brown carved Chinese wooden table
53
2.4.2.14. British Council’s View:
The British Council Bulletin (2000: 2) says that ‘age’ normally
goes after adjectives of size, length and height, but before colour, origin,
material and purpose, Examples:
(1) A big old straw hat.
(2) A charming young university student.
Thus, a complete list could be:
(article) + ‘number’ +‘judgment’/’attitude ‘+ ‘size ‘+ ‘length’ +‘height ‘+
‘age’ + ‘colour’ + ‘origin’ + ‘material’ + ‘purpose’ + ‘noun’.
No. of Ordering
Article
Number
Judgement
Attitude
Size
Length
Height
Age
Colour
Origin
Material
purpose
Noun
Examples
Table (16): British Council’s Model.
The
two
good
nice
large
medium
tall
old
brown
English
wax
frowning
statues
2.4.2.15. Oba’s View:
Oba (2000: 3) suggests the following adjective ordering. It can be
represented by the following table.
Table (17): Oba’s Model.
No. of
Ordering
1
Type of Adjective
Examples
Shape
square, round, …etc.
2
Colour
blue, red, ….etc.
3
Size
big, small, ….etc.
4
Material
5
Others
iron, plastic, ….etc.
health, Japanese
54
2.4.2.16. Darling’s View:
Darling (2003: 11) suggests twelve major categories of adjectives
with their sequence. His view can be represented by the following table:
Table (18): Darling’s Model.
No. of
Ordering
Type of Adjective
Examples
1
Colour
blue, red, green, brown, yellow, black,
white, etc.
2
Size
big, small, little, long, tall, short, same
as
3
Shape
round (a ball), circle (a door knob),
triangle, rectangle (a flag), square (a
block), oval (an egg).
4
Distance
long, short, far, around, start, high,
low
5
good, pretty, right, better, best, full,
Feelings or Qualities funny, light, clean, new, fast, happy,
sad, soft, hard, etc.
6
Quantity
one, two, three, four, five, six, seven,
eight, nine, tine, many, few, all, some,
every, any, first, once, much
7
Temperature
8
Time
9
Nationality or
Origin
10
Material
11
Age
new, old, young, child, adult, baby,
teenage
12
purpose
these adjectives usually end in /ing/
frying pan
cold, warm, hot, cool
late, early, bed, nap, dinner, lunch,
day, morning, night
American, Mexican
wooden, sharp, paper, cloth
Head (Noun)
55
2.4.2.17. British Royal’s View:
British Royal suggests the following order of adjectives. Its view
can be represented by the following table:
Table (19): British Royal’s Model.
Physical description
Determiner
Origin
Observation
Size
Shape
Age
a
beautiful
old
an
Expensive
antique
four
gorgeous
long-
Material
Qualifier
Noun
touring
car
Colour
Italian
red
silver
mirror
silk
roses
stemmed
her
short
our
black
big
those
that
dog
wooden
little
enor-
several
sheep-
English
square
dilapidated
some
old
hair
mous
young
delicious
American
hat
boxes
hunting
cabin
basketball
Thai
2.4.2.18. Haggren’s View:
In discussing the order of adjectives, Haggren (2003: 1) briefly
suggests the following:
1.
Opinion adjectives before descriptive adjectives.
2.
General opinion adjectives before specific opinion adjectives.
3.
In case of use of a noun before another noun, any adjective can be
put before the first noun.
4.
Some adjectives that describe size or age can come after a noun
group consisting of a number or determiner and a noun that indicates
the unit of measurement.
5.
A few adjectives have a different meaning depending on whether
they come before or after a noun.
players
food
56
2.4.2.19. Moure’s View:
Moure (2000: 3) speaks in terms of ‘first’, ‘last’ and length of the
adjective in adjective ordering. His view can be represented by the
following table:
Table (20): Moure’s Model.
No. of
ordering
Type of adjective
Function
First
More general or subjective
1.
Colour
2.
last
Style
red
More specific or objective
Nationality
3.
Length of Adjective
Examples
gothic
English
The long adjective should
come at the end.
A quite intelligent
woman
2.4.2.20. Our Own View:
From our literature review, one can see that the reviewed views
concerning adjective ordering involve two main approaches, namely
syntactic and semantic. As a matter of fact, there is no typical syntactic
approach nor typical semantic approach. They are both interrelated. In
order to adopt a very comprehensive approach which includes all the
possible series of adjectives, we have to adopt an eclectic approach which
is both syntactic and semantic. This approach can be represented by the
following table:
57
Table (21): Our Own Model.
Type of Adjective
the/ a(n), this, these
2
Determiners
my, your, John’s
3
Possessives
best, strongest
4
Superlatives
third, fourth
5
Ordinal number
six, seven
6
Cardinal number
cold, warm, hot, cool
7
Temperature
late, day, night, nap
8
Time
good, bad, excellent
9
Value
long, short, medium
10
Length
long, small
11
Size
tall, high
12
Height
sick, ill, healthy
13
Physical property
fast, quick
14
Speed
happy, sad, eager
15
Human propensity
new, old, young
16
Age
rectangular, round
17
Shape
chipped
18
Condition
red, green, brown
19
Colour
English, Chinese
20
Nationality
British
21
Provenance
Gothic
22
Style
wax, wooden, steel
23
Material
sleeping, dancing
24
Purpose
medical, legal
25
Denominal
Noun Phrase
Logical qualifiers
Post-Adjectival
1
Modifiers
all, some, few, several
Title
Adjectival Modifiers
No.
Pre-Adjectival Modifiers
Examples
Noun (Head)
58
2.5. Adjectives in Arabic:
An adjective in Arabic is called ( ‫)النعت‬. It comes after the
noun. It agrees with the noun in gender, number, case and
definiteness (Khalil, 1999: 163). Adjectives in Arabic can occur
as heads of noun phrases, e.g.
(1) ‫( الفقراء أسعد من االغنياء‬The poor are happier than the rich).
Bishai (1971: 106-107) assumes that in Arabic an
adjective may function also in a modifying or attributive
capacity and modify regular nouns that precede them in word
order. As attributive adjectives, regular and elative adjectives
follow modified nouns and agree with them according to the
modification agreement, namely number, gender, case and
determination:
(2)
‫( وصل الكاتب المعروف‬The well-known writer arrived)
As predicate adjectives, they function as predicates of
sentences or complements of verbs of existence such as ‘‫’كتان‬
(was). In this function, they agree with this subject of the
sentence according to the referential agreement, namely
number and gender only, e.g.
(3) ‫( هذا الرجل جاد‬This man is serious)
Moreover, Svatko (1979) found that all attributive
adjectives in Arabic come after the noun and up to three
adjectives are possible in this position, e.g.
(4) ‫الالمعا‬
‫الذكيا‬
‫الشق اروا‬
‫( الفتيا‬The bright clever blonde girls)
59
One can say that more than three adjectives can come
after the noun they modify, e.g.
(5) ‫الثالث األوائل‬
‫الالمعا‬
‫الذكيا‬
‫الشق اروا‬
‫الفتيا‬
(The first three bright clever blonde girls)
It is apparent from the mentioned example that more than
five adjectives have been used after the noun they modify. Still,
one can say that more than five adjectives can be used after the
noun they modify, e.g.
(6) ‫الطوال الثالث األوائل‬
‫البدينا‬
‫الالمعا‬
‫الشق اروا‬
‫اإلنكليزيا‬
‫الفتيا‬
(The first three tall fat bright clever blonde English girls)
2.6. Types of Adjectives:
Adjectival postmodification is of two types: (1) ‘ ‫’حقيقت‬
(direct) or (2) ‘ ‫( ’س تتبب‬indirect). The ‘direct adjective’
postmodifies the preceding noun, e.g.
(1) ‫( ضيف كريم‬A generous guest)
The ‘indirect adjective’, on the other hand, premodifies a noun
that is coreferential with the head noun, e.g.
(2) ‫( فالح جيد مزرعته‬A farmer whose farm is good)
The ‘indirect adjective’ agrees with the head noun in case and
definiteness and with the noun it premodifies in gender, e.g.
60
(3) ‫( فتاة شقراء أختها‬A girl whose sister is blonde)
(4) ‫( مهندس طويلة زوجته‬An engineer whose wife is tall)
(Khalil, 1999: 163-164)
2.7. Adjective Comparison in Arabic:
The comparative and superlative form is called ‘ ‫أستتم‬
‫( ’التفضتيل‬literally, ‘noun of preference’). This inflectional form
is ‘‫’أفعل‬, e.g.
‫( قوي‬strong) ‫( أقوى‬stronger)
(1) ‫( زك أقوى من احمد‬Zeki is stronger than Ahmed)
(2) ‫( زك أقوى طالب ف المدرسة‬Zeki is the strongest student in the school)
Some adjectives cannot have the comparative ‘‫ ’أفعتل‬form. In
this case, comparison is realized parapheristically, using the
comparative forms ‘‫( ’أشتد‬stronger), ‘‫( ’أكثتر‬more), ‘‫( ’أقتل‬less)
plus the verbal noun in the indefinite accusative case, e.g.
(3) ‫( عل أكثر صرامة من أخيه‬Ali is tougher than his brother)
(4)
‫( هتذا أشتد حمترة متن ذلت‬This is redder/greater in redness than
that)
(Khalil, 1999: 162-163)
61
2.8. Comparison of English and Arabic Adjectives:
It is believed that the main difference between English
and Arabic Adjectives is that the structure of modifying head in
English is based on premodification, whereas in Arabic, it is
based on premodification and postmodification, e.g.
(1) ‫( التالميذ االذكياء الثالثة األوائل‬The first three clever pupils)
Second, Arabic adjectives, unlike English ones, agree with the
noun in number, gender, case and definiteness (see example 1).
Third, the comparative adjective in Arabic does not employ a
special particle equivalent to ‘than’ in English. Rather, ‘than’ is
expressed by ‘‫( ’متن‬from) which also serves as a preposition as
in:
(2) ‫( الرجل أكبر من ولده‬The man is bigger (older) than his son)
Fourth, the superlative form of the English adjective may occur
without a following noun, whereas that of the Arabic adjective
is usually followed by a noun or pronoun, e.g.
(3) Selma is the happiest of women, but Layla is the richest.
‫سلمى أسعد النساء ولكن ليلى اغناهن‬
(Khalil, 1999: 165)
It is to be noted that ‘richest’ stands by itself, whereas ‘‫ ’أغنتى‬is
followed by the pronominal suffix “‫”هن‬.
62
Fifth, adjectives with generic and plural reference can be used
as heads of noun phrases, e.g.
(4) ‫األغنياء الفقراء‬
‫( سيساعد‬The rich will help the poor)
ُ
2.9. Adjective Ordering in Arabic:
Any noun-phrase has a nucleus or head word to which other
elements are related according to certain grammatical rules. It is known
that adjectives in Arabic follow the noun they modify. However, this fact
is not a true obstacle in translation since the Arabic word order ‘noun +
modifier’ is a functional equivalence of the English word order: ‘modifier
+ noun’. This is because such kind of differences in word order does not
change the intended meaning of the message. And then translation is
possible due to the syntactic arrangements that can be relied on to match
the differences between the SL and TL syntactic structures (Al-Najjar,
1990: 41).
Fehri (1999 cited in Kremers, 2000: 1) shows that most modifiers
in the Arabic noun phrase can occur both before the head noun and after
it. The unmarked position differs from modifier to modifier, but as
Shlonesky (2000) notes, there is a remarkable difference between the
postnominal and prenominal modifiers.
(1) .‫هذا الالعب‬
(pre-modification) (This player)
(2) . ‫العب ذك‬
(post-modification) (A clever player)
63
Kremers (2000: 8-9) says “when a noun is combined with more
than one adjective, there is often a clear preference for one specific order
of the adjective”. Take the English example in:
(3) A beautiful gold watch.
There are many such preferred orders which are often related to the
category of adjective combined. Arabic language with postnominal
adjectives, mirrors the order of the English examples:
(4)
‫( ساعة ذهبية جميلة‬A beautiful golden watch)
The adjective ‘golden’ modifies the noun ‘watch’. The two can be
considered to form a semantic unit. The second adjective ‘beautiful’
modifies not just the noun ‘watch’, but the combination ‘gold watch’.
This is expressed in the hierarchical structure because the adjective
‘beautiful’ is emerged not just with noun ‘watch’, but with the complex
‘golden watch’:
D
D
Poss
(def)
A
Poss
beautiful
A
Poss
gold
Poss
N
[- Poss]
watch
64
Fehri (1999, cited in Kremers, 2000: 11) argues that modifiers
in Arabic can sometimes occur predicatively, rather than
attributively:
(5) ‫( الصحف الطويل الفرنس ُّ األصل‬The tall French journalist.)
Normally, a modifier expressing nationality would appear closer to
the noun than a modifier expressing such a quality as ‘tallness’; yet
Kremers (2000: 11) assumes that the difference between attributive
modifiers and predicative modifiers lies in the position in the tree that
they take. In Arabic two orders are possible as well, and there is a strong
preference for conjunction with ‘wa’ (and).
(6) a. ‫( فتاة جميلة ولطيفة‬A beautiful, sweet girl)
b. ‫( فتاة لطيفة وجميلة‬A sweet beautiful girl)
(for further details, see Diab, 1997: 71-83, The Ethnic Minority
Achievement Service Bulletin, 2002: 2)
65
CHAPTER THREE
Translation, Data Analysis, Findings and Discussion
3.1. Translation: General Remarks:
Translation is an incredibly wide notion which can be understood
in different ways. For instance, one may talk of translation as a process or
a product (Hatim and Mason), and identify such sub-types as literary
translation, technical translation, legal translation, journalistic translation
etc. Moreover, while more typically it just refers to the transfer of written
texts, the term sometimes also includes ‘interpreting’. Not surprisingly
many formal definitions have also been offered, each of which reflects a
particular underlying theoretical model. The linguistic aspects of the
translation process have been encapsulated in a large number of
definitions, mostly dating from the 1960s or earlier (Shuttleworth and
Cowie, 1999: 181). Thus, Catford (1965: 20), for example, defines
translation as “the replacement of textual material in one language (SL)
by equivalent textual material in another language (TL). However, as
Sager (1994: 121) points out, most older definitions of this type tend to
centre around the importance of maintaining some kind of ‘equivalence’
66
between ST and TT. Thus for Sager (1994), Jakobson’s is in this
sense innovative. Jakobson (1966: 233) sees translation in semiotic terms
as “an interpretation of verbal signs by means of some other languages”.
Understanding the translation process as a substitution of “messages in
one language not for separate code units, but for entire messages in some
other languages (Jakobson, 1966: 233). Lawendowski (1978: 26) holds
the same view when he defines translation as “the transfer of meaning
from one set of language signs to another set of language signs. An
approach based on the importance of preserving the effect of the original
is given by Nida and Taber (1982). They say “Translation consists in
reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the
source language message, first in terms of meaning and secondly in terms
of style (Nida and Taber, 1982: 12). Nord (1991: 28) defines translation
as “the production of a functional target text maintaining a relationship
with a given source text that is specified according to the intended or
demanded function of the TT. Finally, to reflect the environment in which
much professional translation activity takes place, Sager (1994: 293)
suggests widening previous definitions by specifying that “translation is
an externally motivated industrial activity, supported by information
technology, which is diversified in response to the particular needs of this
form of communication (for further details, see Bathgate, 1981: 12;
Neubert, 1991: 95 and Koller, 1992: 101).
From what has been said so far, one can say that translation has
been viewed either in terms of finding equivalence or in terms of
transference of meaning. In what follows, we will explain these types in
some detail.
67
3.2. Equivalence in Translation:
Equivalence is a term used by many writers to describe the nature
and the extent of the relationships which exist between SL and TL texts
or smaller linguistic units. As such, equivalence is in some senses the
intralingual counterpart of synonymy within a single language and
sometimes across languages (Shuttleworth and Cowie, 1999: 49). Hence,
one should know that Jakobson’s (1966: 233) famous slogan
“equivalence in difference” highlights the added complications which are
associated with it.
The phenomenon of equivalence is indeed complex and its
concept is still controversial. Hermans (1995: 217), for example, has
described it as a “troubled notion: Part of the problem stems from the fact
that the term is also a standard polysemous English word, with the result
that the precise sense in which translation equivalence is understood
varies from one translator to another. Catford (1965: 20), for instance,
defines translation as the replacement of textual material in one language
by the textual material in another language, and argues that one of the
central tasks of translation is that of “defining the nature and conditions
of translation equivalence”. Catford’s view of equivalence as something
essentially quantifiable – and of translation as simply a matter of
replacing each SL item with the most suitable TL equivalent, chosen from
a list of all the limitations of linguistics at that time”(de Beaugrande,
1978: 11). Snell-Hornby (1995: 22) believes that such a view
“presupposes a degree of symmetry between languages, and even distorts
the basic problems of translation”(Snell-Hornby, 1995: 22) in that it
reduces the translation process to a mere linguistic exercise, ignoring
textual, structural, lexical, cultural and other situational factors, which it
68
is now agreed upon to play an important role in translation. This view has
enabled a number of scholars to subdivide the notion of equivalence in
various ways. Thus some have distinguished between the equivalence
found at the levels of different “units of translation”, whereas others have
formulated a number of complete equivalence typologies, such as Nida’s
(1964) “dynamic and formal equivalence”. Kade’s (1968) cited in total
(one-to-one), facultative (one-to-many), approximative (one-to-part) and
zero (one-to-one) equivalence. Koller’s (1992) more wide-ranging
denotative,
connotative,
textual-normative
(i.e.
text
type-based),
pragmatic and formal-aesthetic equivalence, and Popovic’s (1976)
linguistic, paradigmatic, stylistic and textual equivalence. Each of these
individual categories of equivalence encapsulates a particular type of ST
and TT relationships, although few can be said to be complete in
themselves, whereas some (for instance dynamic and formal equivalence)
are mutually exclusive; consequently, the term, which had originally been
introduced in order to define translation scientifically, has become
increasingly complex and fragmented. Many theoreticians of translation
have
suggested
other
terms
such
as
‘similarity’,
‘analogy’
‘correspondence’ or ‘matching’ (cf. Hermans, 1995: 221 and
Shuttleworth and Cowie. 1997: 50). Toury (1980: 28) insists on viewing
every translation as “a concrete act of performance, and proposes that
each TT should be approached via the particular “norms” under which it
was produced, arguing that these norms determine “the equivalence”
manifested by actual translation” (Toury, 1995: 61). Likewise Reiss and
Vermeer (1989) also reinterpret equivalence on the basis of each
individual text, but unlike Toury (1980), in terms of function and
communicative effect. For them, there are no particular features of ST
which automatically need to be preserved in the translation process;
however, they reserve the term ‘equivalence’ for this instance in which
69
ST and TT fulfil the same communicative function (Reiss and Vermeer,
1989: 105-110) (for further details, see Wilss, 1994; Turk, 1990;
Sturrock, 1991; Pym, 1992; Shuttleworth and Cowie, 1997).
3.3. Transference in Translation:
Transference means the “implantation of SL meaning into the
TLT (Catford, 1965: 48). This means that the term refers to a process in
which an SL item is used in a TT, but with an SL meaning. This happens
when for cultural or other reasons TL has no appropriate equivalent for an
SL item and consequently “borrows” the item (Pym, 1992: 89;
Shuttleworth and Cowie, 1999: 179).
However, true transference is not common, as such borrowed
items typically change their meaning, either because the item acquires a
foreign feeling or because only one of the total range of meaning which it
possesses in SL is transferred.
From what has been said so far, one can come to the conclusion
that translation in terms of transference of meaning means conveying the
meaning of the SLT to the TLT (for further detail, see Gentzler, 1993:
183-184; Eco, 1995: 76; Fraser, 1996: 71-72; and Nord, 1997: 53).
3.4. Free Translation:
Free translation is a type of translation in which a focus is on
producing a naturally reading TT than to preserving the ST wording
intact (Shuttleworth and Cowie, 1999: 62). This type of translation is also
known as sense-for-sense translation. Linguists define it as “a translation
made on a level higher than is necessary to convey the content unchanged
while observing TL norms” (Barkhudarov, 1993: 11; Catford, 1965: 25)
believes that it is a prerequisite of free translations that they should also
70
be unbounded as regards the rank on which they are performed. Free
translations are thus more “TL-oriented” than literal translations. Now, it
is generally agreed that free and literal translation do not form a binary
contrast, and that the most appropriate translation strategy will vary
according to the text-type being translated and the purpose of the
translation.
3.5. Communicative Translation:
Communicative translation is a type of translation which is used
as a reference to any approach which views translation as a
“communicative process which takes place with a social context” (Hatim
& Mason, 1990: 3). Obviously, all approaches will to some extent
consider
translation
as
communication;
however,
a
so-called
communicative translation will typically be generally oriented towards
the needs of the TL reader. Thus, for instance, a translator who is
translating communicatively will treat ST as a message rather than a mere
string of linguistic units, and will be concerned to preserve ST’s original
and function and reproduce its effect on the new receptor (Shuttleworth
and Cowie, 1999: 21). An instance of a translation model based on this
type of approach is given by Roberts (1985: 158), who argues that
translation which adheres too closely to the original wording “does not
often result in effective communication in the other language”, but rather
can frequently result in “distortion of the message”. Roberts (1985) uses
Spilka’s definition of a translator as a mediator between “two parties who
would otherwise be unable to communicate; it is the translator’s task to
convey the source message, which Roberts understands as the ST words
plus not only the context in which they occur, but also for non-linguistic
ST parameters (ibid.). These four non-linguistic ST parameters are the
‘source’, or originator of the message, the intended receptor, the object,
71
or purpose of the communication, and the “vector”, or the special and
temporal circumstances in which the translation was produced (Roberts,
ibid.). In the translation, depending on whether ST is expressive,
informative or vocative in nature (Buhler, 1934), the source, object or
intended receptor will be emphasized respectively. In order for the
translation to create the same reaction as ST did from the original
recipients (Roberts, 1985: 149-150). However, since “translation involves
a double act of communication”, a second set of parameters is generated
in the translation process which relates specifically to the translated
message (Pergnier, 1980: 58, cited in Shuttleworth and Cowie, 1999: 2).
Newmark (1988a: 22) also confirms the communicative
translation. The emphasis should be on “conveying the message of the
original in a form which conforms to the linguistic, cultural and
pragmatic conventions of TL rather than mirroring the actual words of ST
as closely as possible without infringing the TL norms”. In this type of
translation, the translator has greater freedom to interpret ST and will
consequently remove ambiguities and even correct the author’s factual
errors. It should be noted that communicative translation is not intended
to be cut-and-dried category. It is intended to represent the “middle
ground” of translation practice” and does not extend to the extremes of
adaptation (Newmark, 1988a: 45 and 1988b: 70).
Hervey and Higgins (1992: 74) also emphasize the communicative method of translation. They define this type of translation as “a style
of free translation which involves the substitution for ST expressions of
their contextually appropriate cultural equivalents in the TL”. This type
of translation is a technique which should not be used extremely freely,
but in situations where literal translation is impossible.
72
3.6. Semantic Translation:
Semantic translation for Newmark (1988a: 22) means “the
reproduction of the precise contextual meaning of the author of the SLT”.
It consequently tends to strive to reproduce the form of the original as
closely as TL norms will allow. In addition, no effort is made to shift ST
into a target cultural context (Shuttleworth and Cowie, 1999: 151). Much
attention is paid to rendering the author’s original thought-processes in
TL than to attempting to re-interpret ST in a way which the translator
considers more appropriate for the target setting; a semantic translation
will; therefore, tackle the original text as sacred, even if this requires
reproducing inconsistencies, ambiguities and errors (cf. Shuttleworth and
Cowie, 1999: 151) (for further detail, see Newmark, 1988a: 22 and
1988b: 34; and Hatim and Mason, 1990: 7).
3.7. Accuracy and Translation:
Accuracy is used in translation assessment to refer to the extent to
which translation runs parallel with its original text (Shuttleworth and
Cowie, 1999: 3). While it usually refers to preservation of the information
being generally literal rather than free, its actual meaning in the context
of a given translation must depend on the type of ‘equivalence’ found in
the translation (Wadensjŏ, 1995: 116). Thus, for instance, Zukofsky and
Zukofsky’s (1969) experimental translation of the Latullus poem aims to
“breathe the literal meaning with the ST author by following the sound,
rhythm and syntax of ST as closely as possible” (Zukofsky and Zukofsky,
1969: 97). This means that, as Venute (1995: 37) argues, the “canons of
accuracy are culturally specific and historically variable. Sager (1994:
148) believes that the establishment of accuracy for a given translation is
73
of course a painstaking procedure which in practice should be carried out
“unit by unit at the level of the phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph and
the whole text”. Popovic (1970: 80) believes that departures from strict
accuracy are frequently perceived as shortcomings; however, in reality
such deviations, particularly in the translation of literary texts, are often
inevitable, as the translator will need to introduce “shift” in order to
reproduce the original “in the totality, as an organic whole” (Shuttleworth
and Cowie, 1999: 3).
3.8. Adequacy and Translation:
Adequacy means discussing the nature of the relationship between
ST and TT. However, even where it occurs, there is little agreement over
the proper application of the term as it is used sometimes synonymously
with, sometimes instead of, and sometimes in contrast with the related
term ‘equivalence’. Adequacy has been viewed differently by different
scholars. In most of these the term has evaluative, even normative
character. However, where the two terms are used side by side, adequacy
generally refers to a less absolute ST–TT relationship than equivalence.
Robinson (1991: 37) for instance, believe that adequacy means “the
relationship between ST and TT with due regard to a purpose which is
being followed in the translation process. Shveitser (1993: 96) defines
adequacy in terms of the translator’s response to the communicative
situation: “adequacy proceeds from the assumption that a decision taken
by the translator frequently has the nature of a compromise, that
translation demands sacrifices, and that in the translation process the
translator frequently has to resign himself to certain losses for the sake of
conveying the main, essential aspects of ST. Thus a translation can be
adequate even if it is equivalent with ST only in one functional
dimension; however, Shveitser (ibid.) believes that it is necessary that
74
“any deviation from equivalence should be dictated by objective
necessity, not by the will of the translator (for further details, see Tsai,
1995: 244; and Shuttleworth and Cowie: 1999: 5).
Toury (1995: 95) points out that one of the two poles of the
continuum which relates to the norms used in the translation process. A
translation is to be considered as adequate if the translator pursues
throughout to follow source rather than target linguistic and literary
norms. This means that a translator who is translating adequately will
perform only those translational ‘shifts’ which are truly obligatory’ thus
producing a TT which where possible retains ST characteristics
unchanged. Such a translational procedure may of course produce a TT
which in some respects is incompatible with target linguistic or literary
norms.
One can come to the conclusion that a translation is adequate if
and only if the meaning of the SLT has been conveyed as closely as
possible, and the TLT has an effect which is similar to the SLT.
3.9. Translation and Structural Ambiguity:
Translation is not a very difficult task to achieve, since this human
activity has been practised between different languages of the world since
ancient times by which man overcome the barrier of language. However,
it is not a simple activity which can be easily conducted. What reinforces
this fact is that translators always face some problems while carrying out
their tedious task which requires many talents, on the part of the
translator. These problems are of different types such as (1) grammatical
and structural problems, (2) lexical problems, (3) cultural problems, and
(4) textual problems. In what follows, we will focus on structural
problems because it lies within the scope of our study.
75
3.9.1. Structural Ambiguity:
Structural ambiguity may result from groupment of the
constituents within the syntagm (Ilyas, 1989:
). The following example
is illustrative.
1. Nice flowers and roses.
In this example, the translator would have to decide whether the
modifier ‘nice’ is to be grouped ‘flowers and roses’. Its translation into
Arabic in accordance with the first option would be:
.‫أزهار جميلة وورود‬
but rendering it in accordance with the second interpretation would be as:
.‫أزهار جميلة وورود جميلة‬
Another instance is that of:
2. English Teacher.
Example (2) is ambiguous, since it has two interpretations. Interpretation
(1) means that the nationality of the teacher is English, while
interpretation (2) means a teacher who teaches English. This structural
ambiguity results in two renderings:
a.
‫مدرس إنكليزي‬
b.
‫مدرس اللغة اإلنكليزية‬
76
3.10. Data Analysis:
The ground has now been prepared for a full-dress analysis of
adjective ordering. Our data which has been taken from different books of
grammar will be analysed in the light of our framework and model which
is a mixture of syntax and semantics, i.e., it is an eclectic approach. As
for translation, we will depend on the method which conveys the meaning
of the SLT as closely as possible whether it is in terms of finding
equivalence or in terms of transference.
SL Text (1):
A beautiful, Spanish red leather belt.
(Shoebottom, 2004: 4)
TL Texts:
.‫ الحزام الجلدي األحمر األسبان الجميل‬.1
.‫ حزام جلدي أحمر أسبان جميل‬.2
.‫ الحزام الجلدي األسبان األحمر الجميل‬.3
.‫ حزام جلدي أحمر أسبان جميل‬.4
.‫ حزام أسبان جلدي أحمر جميل‬.5
Text Analysis:
Title
SLT
TLTs
Adjective Ordering
Type of
Translation
D., Val., Nat., Col., Mat., H.
1 D.+ H., D. + Mat., D. + Col., D. + Nat., D. + Val.
Com.
2 H., Mat., Col., Nat., Val.
Sem.
3 D. + H., D. + Mat., D. + Nat., D. + Col., D.+ Val.
Com.
4 H., Mat., Col., Nat., Val.
Sem.
5 H., Nat., Mat., Col., Val.
Sem.
77
Discussion:
First of all, the reference of the SLT is specific indefinite. The
original author has used a punctuation mark, i.e., he used ‘comma’ after
the adjective of value ‘beautiful’ to make it marked.
Our text analysis shows that different renderings have been given.
Subject (1) has changed the reference of the expression under question
from specific indefinite to specific definite. However, he succeeded in
conveying the proposition. Subject (2) used a semantic translation and
kept the SLT adjective ordering. Subject (3) also changed the reference of
the expression in question from specific indefinite to specific definite. As
for the adjective ordering it seems, that subject (3) has slightly changed
the adjective order. Subject (4) used a semantic translation and used the
same adjective ordering as to that of the SLT. With regard to subject (5)
it seems that he gave an accurate rendering. He put the adjective
of nationality after the head to give it more prominence, that is the
nationality adjective has been marked which means that the rendering is
an effective one.
78
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫حزام جلد أسبان أحمر جميل‬
SL Text (2):
That pretty antique round golden mirror.
(English Outlook, 2000: 1)
TL Texts:
.‫ مرآة ذهبية قديمة مدورة جميلة‬.1
.‫ مرآة ذهبية دائرية جميلة من االنتيكة‬.2
.‫ التحفة الجميلة حول المرآة الذهبية‬.3
.‫ مرآة ذهبية قديمة مدورة وجميلة‬.4
.‫ مرآة أثرية جميلة ومدورة وذهبية‬.5
Text Analysis:
Title
SLT
TLTs
Adjective Ordering
Type of
Translation
D., Val., Age, Shape, Mat., H.
1 H., Mat., Age, Shape, Val.
Com.
2 H., Mat., Shape, Val., Phrase
Com.
3 D. + H., D. + Val., Phrase + Mat.
Com.
4 H., Mat., Age, Shape, Val.
Com.
5 H., Age, Val., Shape, Mat.
Com.
Discussion:
A careful examination of the expression in question, one can see
that the demonstrative ‘that’, which is a determiner in the structure of the
adjective ordering, has been ignored completely by all subjects. This
79
means that all renderings are inadequate and inaccurate. It seems that the
adjective of shape ‘round’ is ambiguous. For this reason, one can see that
subject (3) has changed the proposition of the SLT completely. As for the
type of translation, it is apparent that all subjects have followed a
communicative method of translation. Subject (4) used the conjunction
‘‫( ’و‬and) before the adjective of value to make it more prominent, i.e.,
marked. As for subject (5), he also used the conjunction ‘‫( ’و‬and), but
before the adjective of shape and material. This means that he put an
emphasis on these two adjectives.
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫تل المرآة الذهبية األثرية المدورة الجميلة‬
SL Text (3):
An old wooden boat.
(English Outlook, 2000: 1)
TL Texts:
.‫ القارب الخشب القديم‬.1
.‫ قارب خشب قديم‬.2
.‫ قارب خشب قديم‬.3
.‫ قارب خشب أسود‬.4
.‫ قارب خشب قديم‬.5
80
Text Analysis:
Title
SLT
TLTs
Adjective Ordering
Type of
Translation
D. + Age, Mat., H.
1 D. + H., D. + Mat., D. + Age
Com.
2 H., Mat., Age
Sem.
3 H., Mat., Age
Com.
4 H., Mat., Col.
Sem.
5 H., Mat., Age
Sem.
Discussion:
The reference of the SLT is specific indefinite. It seems that three
kinds of renderings have been given by the subjects. Subject (1) has
changed the reference from specific indefinite to specific definite.
Subjects (3) and (4) succeeded in their renderings because they kept the
same reference, i.e., specific indefinite. In addition, they could convey the
same proposition; therefore, they gave the same effect and shock. As for
subject (4), it is apparent that he was unable to convey the same
proposition, because he replaced the adjective of age ‘‫ ’قتتديم‬by the
adjective of colour ‘‫’أسود‬.
As for type of translation, it seems that subjects (2), (3) and (5)
have used a semantic translation, whereas subject (1), (4) have used a
communicative translation.
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫قارب خشب قديم‬
81
SL Text (4):
Two beautiful small old round yellow Thai wax.
(English Club, 1997: 20)
TL Texts:
.‫ شمعتان صغيرتان قديمتان جميلتان دائرت الشكل من صنع تايلندي‬.1
.‫ شمعتان تايلنديتان جميلتان قديمتان مدورتان وصفراوتان‬.2
.‫ شمعتان صفراوتان مدورتان صغيرتان وقديمتان من صنع تايلندي‬.3
.‫ شمعتان تايلنديتان مدورتان قديمتان صغيرتان جميلتان‬.4
.‫ شمعتان تايلنديتان مدورتان قديمتان صغيرتان جميلتان‬.5
Text Analysis:
Title
SLT
TLTs
Adjective Ordering
Type of
Translation
Card., Val., Size, Age, Shape, Colour, Nat., H.
1 H., Size, Age, Val., Shape, Phrase, Nat.
Com.
2 H., Nat., Val., Age, Shape, Colour
Com.
3 H., Colour, Shape, Size, Age, Phrase, Nat.
Com.
4 H., Nat., Shape, Age, Size, Val.
Com.
5 H., Nat., Shape, Age, Size, Val.
Com.
Discussion:
This noun phrase in the SLT consists of (7) adjectives and a head.
There is no ambiguity because all the adjectives modify the head ‘wax’.
Subject (1) conveyed the proposition inadequately because he neglected
the adjective of colour ‘yellow’. Subject (2) also conveyed the
proposition inadequately because he neglected the adjective of nationality
‘Thai’. Subject (2) and (4) could not convey the proposition adequately
because subject (2) ignored the adjective of size ‘‫’صتتغيرتان‬, whereas
82
subject (4) ignored the adjective of colour ‘‫’صتتفراوتان‬. Subject (5)
succeeded in this rendering because he conveyed the same proposition.
All subjects deleted the cardinal adjective ‘two’ because duality in Arabic
is expressed implicitly, whereas in English it is expressed explicitly.
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫شمعتان صفراوتان دائريتان قديمتان صغيرتان جميلتان من صنع تايلندي‬
SL Text (5):
An attractive young Chinese lady.
(English Outlook, 2001: 1)
TL Texts:
.‫ سيدة صينية شابة جذابة‬.1
.‫ سيدة صغيرة من الصين مثيرة‬.2
.‫ سيدة صينية شابة جذابة‬.3
.‫ سيدة جذابة صينية صغيرة‬.4
.‫ سيدة صغيرة جذابة صينية‬.5
Text Analysis:
Title
SLT
TLTs
Adjective Ordering
Type of
Translation
D., Val., Age, Nat., H.
1 H., Nat., Age, Val.
Sem.
2 H., Age, Phrase, Val.
Com.
3 H., Nat., Age, Val.
Sem.
4 H., Val., Age, Nat.
Com.
5 H., Age, Val., Nat.
Com.
83
Discussion:
Our text analysis shows that subject (1) and (3) have given the
same renderings. They have both used a semantic method of translation,
therefore, they kept the same order to that of English. Subject (2) used a
different order since he emphasized the adjective of age and made it
marked. He failed to give an appropriate lexical equivalent for the
adjective ‘attractive’ since he replaced it by ‘‫ ’مثيترة‬which is not accurate.
As for subject (4), he put an emphasis on the adjective attractive ‘‫;’جذابتة‬
therefore, he did not keep the same order as to that of English. With
regard to subject (5), one can see that the adjective of age has been
marked, i.e., it has been given more emphasis. A part from subjects (1)
and (3) who used a semantic method of translation, one can see that
others have used a communicative translation.
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫سيدة صينية شابة جذابة‬
SL Text (6):
Pretty red wooden balls.
(Hetzron, 1978: 168)
TL Texts:
.‫ الك ار الخشبية الحمراء الجميلة‬.1
.‫ ك ار خشبية حمراء جميلة‬.2
.‫ الك ار الخشبية الحمراء الجميلة‬.3
.‫ ك ار خشبية حمراء جميلة‬.4
.‫ ك ار جميلة خشبية حمراء‬.5
84
Text Analysis:
Title
SLT
TLTs
Adjective Ordering
Type of
Translation
Val., Col., Mat., H.
1 D. H., D. + Mat., D. + Col., D. + Val.
Com.
2 H., Mat., Col., Val.
Sem.
3 D. H., D. + Mat. + D. + Col., D. + Val.
Com.
4 H., Mat., Col., Val.
Sem.
5 H., Val., Mat., Col.
Com.
Discussion:
It is apparent from our text analysis that different renderings have
been given. Subjects (1) and (3) have given the same renderings, but they
failed to give appropriate renderings simply, because they changed the
reference of the example in question from specific indefinite reference to
specific definite reference. With regard to subjects (2) and (4), it seems
that both gave the same renderings. They succeeded in conveying the
meaning of the SLT to the TLT; and; therefore, they gave the same effect
and shock. They followed the same order as to that of English. As for
subject (5), one can see that he violated the order of the SLT and
followed a completely different order. This means that he used a
communicative translation because he made the adjective ‘pretty’ ‘‫’جميلتة‬
more prominent that others. Thus, the adjective ‘‫ ’جميلة‬has been marked.
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫الك ار الخشبية الجميلة الحمراء‬
85
SL Text (7):
A beautiful carved bronzed aluminum frame.
(Quirk et al, 1985: 93)
TL Texts:
.ً‫ إطار األلمنيوم البرونزي المنحو بشكل جميل جدا‬.1
.‫ إطار مصنوع من األلمنيوم بلون البرونز منقوش بشكل جيد‬.2
.‫ إطار األلمنيوم المنقوش بالبرونز الجميل‬.3
.‫ إطار األلمنيوم البرونزي منقوش بشكل جيد‬.4
.‫ إطار األلمنيوم البرونزي مصنوع بشكل جيد‬.5
Text Analysis:
Title
SLT
TLTs
Adjective Ordering
Type of
Translation
D., Val., Cond. Col., Noun, H.
1 H., D. + Noun, D. + Col., D. + Cond. Phrase
Com.
2 H., Phrase, D.+ Noun, Phrase, Col.,Con.+ Phrase
Com.
3 H., D. + Noun, D. + Cond., D. + Col., D. + Val.
Com.
4 H., D. + Noun, D. + Col., Cond., Phrase
Com.
5 H., D. + Noun, D. + Col., Phrase
Com.
Discussion:
A close examination of our text analysis, one can deduce that all
subjects have used a communicative translation and they could convey
the meaning of the SLT and implant it into the TLTs. However, all of
them did not pay attention to the adjective ordering and ignored the
syntactic structure of the phrase under discussion. As for the reference of
the noun phrase in question, it seems that only subject (2) has used the
same reference as to that of English which is specific indefinite. With
86
regard to subjects (1), (3), (4) and (5), it seems that they have changed the
reference of the expression. They used a specific definite reference.
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫إطار المنيونين برونزي منقوش جميل‬
SL Text (8):
A small shiny black leather handbag.
(Swan, 1980: 19)
TL Texts:
.‫ الحقيبة الجلدية الصغيرة السوداء اللماعة‬.1
.‫ حقيبة يد مصنوعة من الجلد األسود اللماع صغير الحجم‬.2
.‫ حقيبة يد جلدية سوداء زاهية صغيرة‬.3
.‫ حقيبة يدوية جلدية سوداء المعة صغيرة‬.4
.‫ حقيبة جلدية سوداء المعة صغيرة‬.5
Text Analysis:
Title
SLT
TLTs
Adjective Ordering
Type of
Translation
D., Size, Cond., Col., Mat., Pur., H.
1 D.+ H., D.+ Mat., D. + Age, D. + Col., D. + Con.
Com.
2 H., Pur., Phrase, D.+Mat., D.+Col., D.+Con.+
Com.
Phrase
3 H., Pur., Mat., Col., Cond., Size
Sem.
4 H., Pur., Mat., Col., Cond., Size
Sem.
5 H., Mat., Col., Cond., Size
Sem.
87
Discussion:
In example (8) the reference of the expression under discussion is
specific indefinite. All subjects have kept the same reference except
subject (1) who has changed the reference into specific definite. As for
the type of translation, it seems that all subjects have followed a semantic
method of translation except subject (2) who used a communicative
translation. Subject (1) and (2) succeeded only in conveying the meaning
of the SLT to the TLT. However, they ignored the syntactic structure of
the adjective ordering. While subjects (3), (4), (5) succeeded in
conveying the meaning of the SLT as well as keeping its syntactic
structure, i.e., they kept the same adjective ordering as to that of the SLT.
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫حقيبة يد جلدية سوداء المعة وصغيرة‬
SL Text (9):
Some small round plastic tables.
(Colchester English Study Centre, 1995: 1)
TL Texts:
.‫اللدائنية المدورة الصغيرة‬
‫ بعض الطاوال‬.1
.‫البالستيكية المدورة الصغيرة‬
‫ بعض الطاوال‬.2
.‫البالستيكية الصغيرة‬
‫ بعض الطاوال‬.4
.‫البالستيكية الصغيرة‬
.‫البالستيكية المدورة الصغيرة‬
‫ بعض الطاوال‬.3
‫ بعض الطاوال‬.5
88
Text Analysis:
Title
SLT
TLTs
Adjective Ordering
Type of
Translation
Log., Size, Shape, Mat., H.
1 Log., D.+H., D.+Mat., D.+Shape, D.+Size
Com.
2 Log., D.+H., D.+Mat., D.+Shape, D.+Size
Sem.
3 Log.+D.+H., D.+Mat., D.+Size
Com.
4 Log.+D.+H., D.+Mat., D.+Size
Com.
5 Log.+D.+H., D.+Mat., D.+Shape, D.+Size
Sem.
Discussion:
Our text analysis reveals that there are two types of renderings.
Type one includes renderings (1), (2) and (4). In these renderings, it
seems that subjects (1), (2) and (3) have used a semantic translation.
Their adjective ordering is similar to that of the SLT. Apart from the
definite article which has been attached to all adjectives in Arabic, one
can say that there is one-to-one correspondence between English and
Arabic.
As for the second type of renderings which involves renderings
(3) and (4), it seems that subjects (3) and (4) have used a communicative
translation. They both deleted the adjective of shape. This means that
their renderings are inadequate and inaccurate because they failed to
convey the exact proposition of the SLT to the TLT.
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫البالستيكية الدائرية الصغيرة‬
‫بعض الطاوال‬
89
SL Text (10):
A beautiful historic Japanese Temple.
(Swan, 1980: 20)
TL Texts:
‫ المعهد اليابان التاريخ الجميل‬.1
.‫ معهد يابان جميل ومهم‬.2
.‫ المعهد اليابان التاريخ الجميل‬.3
.‫ معهد يابان تاريخ جميل‬.4
.‫ معهد يابان تاريخ جميل‬.5
Text Analysis:
Title
Adjective Ordering
D., Val., Denom., Nat., H.
SLT
TLTs
Type of
Translation
1
2
3
4
5
D.+H., D.+Nat., D.+Denom., D.+Val.
H., Nat., Val., Val.
D.+H., D.+Nat., D.+Denom., D.+Val.
H., Nat., Denom., Val.
H., Nat., Denom., Val.
Sem.
Sem.
Sem.
Sem.
Sem.
Discussion:
A close examination of the TL texts, one can see three types of
renderings. Type one includes renderings (1) and (3). In these renderings,
the definite article ‘‫ ’التت‬has been used instead of the indefinite article ‘a’.
This means that the reference has been changed from specific indefinite
to specific definite. In addition, the definite article ‘‫ ’التت‬has been attached
to all adjectives as well as the head.
As for the second type, which involves rendering (2), it seems that
the subject has replaced the adjective ‘historic’ by the adjective ‘‫’مهتم‬. In
fact, this is inaccurate since it affects the proposition of SLT.
90
With regard to renderings (4) and (5), it seems that both subjects
have succeeded in conveying the proposition of the SLT to the TLT.
Furthermore, they kept the same reference which is specific indefinite.
This means that there is a one-to-one correspondence between the SLT
and renderings (4) and (5).
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫معبد يابان تاريخ جميل‬
SL Text (11):
An old English Grammar textbook.
(Quirk et al., 1985: 95)
TL Texts:
.‫ كتاب النحو اإلنكليزي القديم‬.1
.‫ كتاب منهج للنحو اإلنكليزي القديم‬.2
.‫ كتاب قواعد اللغة اإلنكليزية القديم‬.3
.‫ كتاب قديم لقواعد اللغة اإلنكليزية‬.4
.‫ كتاب النحو اإلنكليزية القديم‬.5
Text Analysis:
Title
SLT
TLTs
Adjective Ordering
Type of
Translation
D., Age, Nat. Noun, H.
1 H., N., Phrase, D. + Nat., D. + Age
Sem.
2 H., Noun + D. + Noun, D. + Nat., D. + Age
Sem.
3 H., Noun, D. + Noun, D. + Nat., D. + Age
Com.
4 H., Age, Noun D. + Noun, D. + Nat.
Com.
5 H., D. + Noun, D. + Nat., D. + Age
Sem.
91
Discussion:
Our text analysis shows that the whole sequence of adjectives in
the SLT modifies the head “textbook”. So, there is no ambiguity. As for
its renderings, one can find three types of renderings. Type one includes
renderings (1) and (5). These two renderings are both ambiguous, simply,
because the adjective of age ‘‫ ’القتتديم‬can modify “‫ ”النحتتو‬and “‫”كتتتاب‬
simultaneously. Type two, which involves rendering (2) is not
ambiguous, because the adjective ‘‫ ’القتديم‬describes only ‘‫’النحتو‬, and hence,
the effect is not the same as that of the SLT. Type three which is
represented by renderings (3) and (4) in which the adjective ‘‫’قتتديم‬
modifies the head ‘‫ ’كتاب‬only, conveys, approximately speaking, the same
effect.
As for type of translation, it seems that subjects (1), (2) and (5)
have used a communicative translation, whereas subjects (3) and (4) have
used a semantic translation.
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫كتاب منهج قديم ف قواعد اللغة اإلنكليزية‬
SL Text (12):
The big beautiful white wooden house.
(Vendler, 1968: 122)
TL Texts:
.‫ المنزل الخشب األبيض الكبير الجميل‬.1
.‫خشب جميل أبيض اللون كبير‬
‫ بي‬.2
92
.‫خشب أبيض كبير وجميل‬
.‫خشب أبيض كبير وجميل‬
‫ بي‬.3
‫ بي‬.4
.‫ المنزل الخشب الكبير الجميل‬.5
Text Analysis:
Title
SLT
TLTs
Adjective Ordering
Type of
Translation
Det., Size, Val., Col., Mat., H.
1 D. + H., D. + Mat., D.+ Col., D. + Size, D.+ Val.
Sem.
2 H., Mat., Val., Col. + Phrase, Size
Com.
3 H., Mat., Col., Size, Val.
Com.
4 H., Mat., Col., Size, Val.
Com.
5 D. + H., D. + Mat., D. + Size, D. + Val.
Com.
Discussion:
In this example the reference is specific definite. Subject (2), (3)
and (4) have failed to give appropriate and accurate renderings, simply,
because they changed the reference of the SLT from specific definite into
specific indefinite. Subject (2) did not follow the same ordering. He
added the word “‫ ”اللتون‬which is not there in the SLT. Subject (3) and (4)
used the conjunction ‘‫ ’و‬before the adjective of value to make it marked
or more prominent. As for subject (5), it seems that he ignored the
adjective of colour which might be due to his belief that it is redundant.
Both subjects (1) and (5) kept the same reference of the SLT. This means
that they were both aware of the expression in question.
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫المنزل الخشب األبيض الكبير الجميل‬
93
SL Text (13):
A Chinese silk wedding dress.
(Neil et al, 1987: 162)
TL Texts:
.‫ ثوب زفاف صين مصنوع من الحرير‬.1
.‫ ثوب زفاف صين مصنوع من الحرير‬.2
. ‫ فستان عرس من الحرير الصين‬.3
. ‫ ثوب زفاف من الحرير الصين‬.4
.‫ جينز أزرق قصير مصنوع من الحرير‬.5
Text Analysis:
Title
SLT
TLTs
Adjective Ordering
Type of
Translation
Det. Nat., Mat., Pur., H.
1 H., Noun, Nat., Phrase, D. + Mat.
Com.
2 H., Noun, Nat., Phrase, D. + Mat.
Com.
3 H., Noun, Preposition, D. + Mat., D. + Nat.
Com.
4 H., Noun, Preposition, D. + Mat., D. + Nat.
Com.
5 H., Col., Height, Phrase, D. + Mat.
Com.
Discussion:
In this example, the nationality adjective ‘Chinese’ is modifying
the noun ‘silk’. For this reason, it has been marked. However, the whole
group ‘a Chinese silk wedding’ is modifying the head ‘dress’.
With regard to the renderings of this sentence, one can find three
kinds of renderings. Group (1) which includes renderings (1) and (2),
there is a failure on the part of the subjects because the adjective ‘ ‫ ’صين‬in
these renderings modifies “‫ ”زفتاف‬rather than ‘‫’ثتوب‬. As for the second type
94
which includes rendering (5), one can say that the rendering is incorrect,
simply because subject (5) has ignored completely the nationality
adjective ‘Chinese’ and added several lexicons which do not exist in the
SLT. In other words, he added a piece of proposition which is not found
in the original proposition.
As for subjects (3) and (4) which represent type three, they are
accurate and adequate renderings. Because they were able to convey the
proposition of the SLT. Indeed, they succeeded in conveying the same
effect and shock.
With regard to the type of translation, it is apparent that all
subjects used a communicative method. It seems that all subjects were not
after realizations, but after the proposition and the effect.
The Proposed Rendering:
. ‫ثوب عرس حريري صين‬
SL Text (14):
A lovely, stylish, large, old, rectangular, brown, English, oak, table.
(Radly and Burke, 2003: 3)
TL Texts:
.‫ منضدة كبيرة مستطيلة بنية اللون أنيقة من خشب البلوط اإلنكليزي‬.1
.‫ منضدة قديمة وجميلة وكبيرة مصنوعة من خشب البلوط بنية اللون ومستطيلة الشكل‬.2
.‫ طاولة بلوطية إنكليزية بنية اللون مستطيلة الشكل واسعة جميلة الطراز‬.3
.‫طراز جيد من خشب البلوط اإلنكليزي‬
‫ طاولة جميلة بنية مستطيلة قديمة ذا‬.4
.‫ طاولة إنكليزية بنية جميلة وأنيقة وكبيرة وقديمة مربعة الشكل مصنوعة من خشب البلوط‬.5
95
Text Analysis:
Title
Adjective Ordering
SLT
D. + Cal., Style, Size, Age, Shape, Col., Nat.,
Mat., H.
1 H., Size, Shape, Colour, Phrase, Phrase, Nat.
2 H., Age, Val., Size, Phrase, Mat., Col., Phrase,
TLTs
Shape + Phrase
3 H., Mat., Nat., Col., Phrase, Shape, Phrase, Size,
Value, Phrase
4 H., Val., Col., Shape, Age, Phrase, Mat., Nat.
5 H., Nat., Col., Val., Phrase, Size, Age, Shape,
Phrase, Phrase, Mat.
Type of
Translation
Com.
Com.
Com.
Com.
Com.
Discussion:
First of all, the reference of this expression is specific indefinite.
The writer of the SLT has used a punctuation mark, i.e., he inserted
commas between the sequence of adjectives. He used commas in order to
put an emphasis on each adjective. it seems that all subjects have used a
communicative translation. They were, in fact, after the proposition rather
than the syntactic structure of adjective ordering.
As for the punctuation marks, it is apparent that all subjects have
ignored them, simply, because Arabic language is not characterised by
using punctuation marks, particularly, commas. In Arabic commas are
replaced by the conjunction ‘‫( ’و‬and). And this fact is clear from the
renderings that have been given. As a result of this, one can say that there
is no one-to-one correspondence between the expression in question and
its renderings as far as the syntactic structure of the adjective ordering is
concerned.
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫منضدة البلوط اإلنكليزية مستطيلة قديمة وكبيرة وواسعة وعريضة من خشب‬
96
SL Text (15):
A grey crumbling Gothic church tower.
(Swan, 1980: 19)
TL Texts:
.‫ برج الكنيسة الكاثوليكية المتحطمة الرصاصية‬.1
.‫ برج كنسية قوطية متكسر رمادي‬.2
.‫ برج الكنسية القوطية الرمادية المحطمة‬.3
.‫ برج كنسية قوطية رمادي‬.4
.‫ برج كنسية قوطية رمادي ومنهار‬.5
Text Analysis:
Title
SLT
TLTs
Adjective Ordering
Type of
Translation
D., Col., Pur., Style, N., H.
1 H., D. + N., D. + Style, D. + Col., D. + Pur.
Com.
2 H., N., Style, Pur., Col.
Sem.
3 H., D. + N., D. + Style, D. + Col., D. + Pur.
Com.
4 H., N., Style, Col.
Com.
5 H., N., Style, Col., Pur.
Com.
Discussion:
In this example, the reference is specific indefinite. Subject (1)
and (3) have changed the reference into specific definite. However, others
have kept the same reference. Subject (1) followed the SLT adjective
ordering, which means that he used a semantic translation. Subject (2)
also used a semantic translation, he did not violate the adjective ordering
of the SLT. As for subject (4), it seems that he completely ignored the
97
adjective of purpose ‘crumbling’ which means that his rendering is
inadequate and inaccurate. With regard to subject (5) one can say that the
conjunction ‘‫( ’و‬and) has been used before the adjective of purpose
‘crumbling’ (‫ )منهتار‬to make it more prominent, i.e., marked. One thing
should be said about this expression, in that the order of the adjectives of
‘colour’ and ‘purpose’ is ambiguous, because they may describe the
church or the tower of church. This ambiguity has been reflected in
renderings (1) and (3). In these two renderings the adjectives modify
the church. While, in renderings (2), (3) and (5) they modify the
‘tower’ (‫)برج‬.
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫برج كنيسة قوط كنائس منهار‬
SL Text (16):
These ugly old black wooden statues.
(Berry, 1985: 71)
TL Texts:
.‫ هذه التماثيل الخشبية السوداء القديمة القبيحة‬.1
.‫ التماثيل الخشبية السوداء والقديمة وقبيحة المنظر‬.2
.‫ تماثيل خشبية سوداء قديمة قبيحة‬.3
.‫ هذه التماثيل الخشبية السوداء القديمة‬.4
.‫ هذه التماثيل الخشبية القديمة القبيحة‬.5
98
Text Analysis:
Title
SLT
TLTs
Adjective Ordering
Type of
Translation
D., Val., Age, Col., Mat., H.
1 D.+D.+H., D.+Mat., D.+ Col., D. + Age, D.+Val.
Com.
2 D.+H., D. + Mat., D. + Col., D. + Age, D. + Val.,
Com.
Phrase
3 H., Mat., Col., Age, Val.
Com.
4 D. + D. + H., D. + Mat., D. + Col., D. + Age
Com.
5 D. + D. + H., D. + Mat., D. + Age, D. + Val.
Com.
Discussion:
The SLT has a specific definite reference. This is due to the
presence of the demonstrative pronoun ‘these’. Subject (3) has given an
inaccurate rendering, simply, because he changed the reference into
specific indefinite. As for subject (2) it seems that he ignored the
demonstrative pronoun ‘these’ (‫ ;)هتتذه‬therefore, one can say that his
rendering is inadequate. With regard to subject (4) it is apparent that he
has ignored the adjective of value ‘ugly’. His ignorance of this adjective
might be due to his belief that it is redundant. As for subject (5) it seems
that he deleted the adjective of colour ‘black’ (‫ )السوداء‬which might be due
to his belief that it is redundant, and it can be deduced from the adjectives
of age and material. From our text analysis, one can see that all subjects
have used a communicative translation. This means that they are after the
proposition of the expression in question rather than the syntactic
structure of the adjective ordering.
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫هذه التماثيل الخشبية السوداء القديمة القبيحة‬
99
SL Text (17):
These two big new red English wooden chairs.
(Weinnhold, 2000: 1)
TL Texts:
.‫ هذان الكرسيان الخشبيان اإلنكليزيان الحم اروان الجديدان الكبيران‬.1
.‫ الكرسيان الخشبيان اإلنكليزيان الكبيران الحم اروان الجديدان‬.2
.‫ الكراس الخشبية اإلنكليزية الحمراء الجديدة الكبيرة‬.3
.‫ اثنين من الكراس الخشبية اإلنكليزية الحمراء الجديدة الكبيرة‬.4
.‫ الكرسيان الخشبيان اإلنكليزيان الكبيران الحم اروان الجديدان‬.5
Text Analysis:
Title
Type of
Translation
Adjective Ordering
D., Card., Size, Age, Col., Nat., Mat., H.
SLT
1 D. + D. + H., D. + Mat., D. + Nat., D. + Col.
2
TLTs
3
4
5
D.+Age, D. + Size
D. + H., D. + Mat., D. + Nat., D.
D. + Col., D. + Age
D. + H., D. + Mat., D. + Nat., D.
D. + Age, D. + Size
Card., Phrase, D. + H., D. + Mat., D.
D. + Col., D. + Age, D. + Size
D. + H., D. + Mat., D. + Nat., D.
D. + Col., D. + Age
Com.
+ Size,
Com.
+ Col.,
Com.
+ Nat.,
Com.
+ Size,
Com.
Discussion:
A careful examination of the SLT, one can say that it has a
specific definite reference. Subject (1) has given an accurate rendering
because he was able to convey the proposition of the SLT to the TLT. He
deleted the cardinal number ‘two’, simply, because in Arabic there is
duality. So, the function of two can be realized implicitly. As for subject
(2), it is apparent that he has deleted the demonstrative pronoun ‘these’
which means that his rendering is inadequate. With regard to subject (3),
100
one can find that his rendering is inaccurate, simply, because he ignored
the dual system of Arabic. This means that the subject is unaware of the
number system of both languages. Regarding subject (4), one can say that
he was under the effect of SLT because he used the cardinal number
‘‫ ’أثنتين‬which is redundant in Arabic. As for subject (5), it seems that he
also ignored the demonstrative pronoun ‘these’. Thus, he gave an
inadequate rendering.
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫هذان الكرسيان الخشبيان اإلنكليزيان األحمران الجديدان الكبيران‬
SL Text (18):
Her three new expensive blue books.
(Weinnhold, 2000: 1)
TL Texts:
.‫ كتبها الثالثة الزرقاء الجديدة الثمينة‬.1
.‫ كتبها الزرقاء الجديدة الغالية الثمن‬.2
.‫ كتبها الثالثة الجديدة الثمينة الزرقاء‬.3
.‫ كتبها الزرقاء الغالية الجديدة‬.4
.‫ كتبها الجديدة الثالثة غالية الثمن زرقاء اللون‬.5
Text Analysis:
Title
Adjective Ordering
Poss., Card. Age, Val., Col., H.
SLT
TLTs
Type of
Translation
1
2
3
4
5
H.+Poss., D.+Card., D.+ Col., D.+ Age, D.+ Val.
H.+Poss., D.+Col., D. + Age, D. + Val., Phrase
H.+Poss., D.+Card., D.+Age, D.+Val., D.+ Col.
H.+Poss., D.+Col., D. + Val., D. + Age
H.+Poss., D.+Age, D.+Card., Val., Phrase, Col.,
Phrase.
Com.
Com.
Com.
Com.
Com.
101
Discussion:
A close inspection of the SLT, one can find that the reference is
specific definite. All subjects have succeeded in conveying the reference
of the SLT to the TLT. The possessive pronoun which is a determiner is
explicit in the SLT. While, its realization in all renderings is implicit, and
this is due to the nature of the Arabic language. It seems that there is no
unanimous agreement among the subjects about the adjective ordering of
the expression in question. Every subject gave his own ordering taking
the transference of meaning into consideration and not the syntactic
structure of the adjective sequence in the noun phrase which might be due
to their ignorance of this structure. In fact, all subjects could convey the
proposition of the SLT except subject (4) who gave an inadequate
rendering. He ignored the cardinal number and this resulted in absence of
an effective rendering.
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫كتبها الثالثة الزرقاء الثمينة الجديدة‬
SL Text (19):
Those first three tall old black African Leaders.
(Al-Sulaimaan, 2002: 27)
TL Texts:
.‫ أولئ القادة الثالثة األفريقيون السود المسنون الطوال األوائل‬.1
.‫ أولئ القادة األفريقيون السود المسنون الطوال الثالثة األوائل‬.2
.‫ أولئ القادة الثالثة األوائل األفريقيون السود المسنون الطوال‬.3
.‫ أولئ القادة األفريقيون المسنون السود الطوال الثالثة األوائل‬.4
.‫ أولئ القادة األفريقيون السود المسنون الطوال الثالثة األوائل‬.5
102
Text Analysis:
Title
Adjective Ordering
D., Ord., Card, Height, Age, Col., Nat., H.
SLT
1 D., D. + H., D. + Card., D. + Nat., D. + Col.,
2
TLTs
Type of
Translation
3
4
5
D. + Age, D. + Height, D. + Ord.
D., D. + H., D. + Nat., D. + Col., D. + Age,
D. + Height, D. + Card. D. + Ord.
D., D. + H., D. + Card., D. + Ord., D. + Nat.,
D. + Col., D. + Age, D. + Height
D. + D. + H., D. + Nat., D. + Age, D. + Col.,
D. + Height, D. + Card. D. + Ord.
D., D. + H., D. + Nat., D. +Col., D. + Age.,
D. + Height, D. + Card. D. + Ord.
Com.
Com.
Com.
Com.
Com.
Discussion:
In this example, the reference is specific definite. No doubt, all
subjects have succeeded in conveying this specific reference to the TLT.
Our text analysis shows that there is no one-to-one correspondence
between the SLT and the TLTs. For instance, the use of the demonstrative
pronoun ‘these’ and the definite article ‘the’ in English is mutually
exclusive, whereas in Arabic they can be used together. In addition, here,
there is a sort of zero translation, because in the SLT there is no definite
article, whereas in Arabic, it has been inserted before every adjective and
even before the ‘head, and this is due the nature of Arabic language.
Furthermore, the syntactic structure of the adjective ordering is that of the
pre-modification in English, whereas in Arabic it is that of both premodification and post-modification. As for the adjective ordering it seems
that Arabic is more flexible than English, and this is due to the fact that
Arabic is characterised by using word order heavily. For this reason, we
can see that every subject has used his own ordering depending upon
which adjective is going to be emphasized.
103
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫أولئ القادة األفارقة السود المسنون الطوال الثالثة األوائل‬
SL Text (20):
These four new small red Japanese cars.
(Al-Sulaimaan, 2002: 29)
TL Texts:
.‫ هذه السيا ار اليابانية الحمراء الصغيرة الجديدة األربعة‬.1
.‫ هذه السيا ار اليابانية الصغيرة الحمراء األربعة الجديدة‬.2
.‫ هذه السيا ار األربعة اليابانية الصغيرة الحمراء الجديدة‬.3
.‫ هذه السيا ار األربعة الصغيرة الجديدة اليابانية الحمراء‬.4
.‫ هذه السيا ار اليابانية الصغيرة الجديدة الحمراء األربعة‬.5
Text Analysis:
Title
Type of
Translation
Adjective Ordering
D., Card., Age, Size, Col., Nat., H.
SLT
1 D., D.+H., D.+Nat., D.+Col., D.+Size, D.+Age,
2
TLTs
3
4
5
D.+Card.
D., D.+H., D.+Nat., D.+Size.,
D.+Card., D.+Age.
D., D.+H., D.+Card., D.+Nat., D.+Size,
D.+Age
D., D.+H., D.+Card., D.+Size, D.+Age,
D.+Col.
D., D.+H., D.+Nat., D.+Size, D.+Age,
D.+Card.
Com.
D.+Col.,
Com.
D.+Col.,
Com.
D.+Nat.,
Com.
D.+Col.,
Com.
Discussion:
The example under discussion has a specific definite reference. Its
reference has been conveyed to the TLT successfully by all subjects. No
doubt, all subjects have used a communicative translation, simply,
104
because there is no one-to-one correspondence between the SLT and the
TLT. For instance, the demonstrative pronoun ‘these’ in English cannot
be used with the definite article ‘the’ since they are mutually exclusive.
However, it is apparent that in Arabic both the demonstrative pronoun
‘these’ and the definite article ‘the’ can be used both together, and this
fact is revealed in the renderings of all subjects. As for the adjective
ordering, it seems that there is no particular structure in Arabic, simply,
because Arabic language is characterised by using word order heavily
depending upon which adjective is going to be emphasized. Therefore,
one can say that all subjects have succeeded in conveying the meaning of
the SLT to the TLT.
The Proposed Rendering:
.‫هذه السيا ار اليابانية الحمراء الصغيرة الجديدة األربع‬
.‫هذه السيا ار األربع اليابانية الحمراء الصغيرة الجديدة‬
One final point should be said about the structure of adjective
ordering in Arabic, is that the nearer the adjective to the head is the more
emphasized the adjective is.
3.11. Findings and Discussion:
As it has been already mentioned in this study, adjective ordering
structures were investigated in (20) instances taken from different books
of English Grammar and Articles with their (5) renderings by five
subjects (assistant lecturers) in the Department of Translation/ College of
Arts/ University of Mosul. The selected adjective ordering structures with
their renderings were analysed in terms of adjective ordering (i.e.,
Determiner, Ordinal numbers, Cardinal numbers, Adjective of Size,
Adjective of Age, Adjective of Colour, Adjective of Nationality,
Adjective of Value…etc.) (see our model P.61). The adjective ordering
105
structures in English were compared with their renderings in order to find
how the structures in question are realized in Arabic. As for our proposed
rendering, we depended on the preference principle, Arab linguists
intuition and language usage.
The main findings arrived at in the present study are as follows:
1.
All subjects used both semantic and communicative translations
with varying percentages. (24) instances (24%) were translated
semantically, whereas
(76) instances
(76%) were translated
communicatively. This can be attributed to the fact that there is no
one-to-one correspondence between English and Arabic as far as the
adjective ordering is concerned.
2.
In both English and Arabic, adjectives modify the head; yet, the
two languages differ in that English adjectives normally pre-modify
the head (see examples 1-20). While in Arabic, adjectives pre-modify
and post-modify the head (see the renderings of all examples about
pre-modification and some renderings of most examples under
discussion, particularly 1, 9, 16, 19 and 20 about post-modification).
These differences in the adjectives function in both languages result in
translation in terms of transference of meaning rather than in terms of
finding equivalence.
3.
Adjective ordering in English is governed either by syntactic and
semantic rules or by markedness theory (see 2.2 and 2.3). While
adjective ordering in Arabic is not fixed like English and thus any
change in the order of adjectives does not alter the essential sense of
the phrase, but may result in a shifting of emphasis (see most
renderings of the examples under discussion).
4.
The cardinal adjective ‘two’ is not realized in the renderings of our
subjects explicitly, simply, because Arabic is characterised by having
duality system (see example 17 and its renderings).
5.
In both English and Arabic adjectives are said to be subordinate to
the head, but in English this subordination is implied (see examples 1-
106
20). In Arabic, however, it is explicit, in that the adjective agrees with
the head in number, gender, case and definiteness (see examples 6, 9,
17, 18, 19 and 20).
6.
In English, the articles (both definite and indefinite) are mutually
exclusive with the demonstrative pronouns. While in Arabic they are
not mutually exclusive, but they co-occur (see examples 16, 17, 19
and 20 with their renderings).
7.
Arabic adjectives demonstrate more flexibility of occurrence than
those of English (see most renderings of the examples in question).
8.
The number of modifiers in English is richer than Arabic (see the
syntactic and semantic models of adjective ordering in chapter two).
As for Arabic, the adjective ordering is based on one’s, intuition, shift
of emphasis and language usage.
9.
Syntactically, adjectives in English are related to their head directly
(see examples 1-20). In Arabic, adjectives may be related to the head
directly (see the renderings of examples 1-20) or indirectly (see the
renderings of SL Texts 2 and 3).
107
CHAPTER FOUR
Conclusions, Recommendations, and Suggestions
for Further Research
4.1. Conclusions:
On the basis of our introductory chapter, reviewing chapter and
the practical chapter, the present study has come up with the following
conclusions:
1.
Our literature review reveals that the reviewed views concerning
adjective ordering involve two main models, namely syntactic and
semantic. As a matter of fact, there is no typical syntactic model nor
typical semantic model. They are both interrelated (see 2.4.1 and
2.4.2).
2.
In order to adopt a very comprehensive model which includes all
the possible series of adjectives, an eclectic model which is both
syntactic and semantic has been suggested (see 2.4.2.20).
3.
There is no one-to-one correspondence between the modification
system in English and Arabic. In English, adjectives premodify the
108
head. While in Arabic they premodify and postmodify the head (see
the most renderings of the subjects).
4.
There is no one-to-one correspondence between adjective ordering
in English and Arabic. Adjective ordering in English and Arabic is
governed by syntactic constraints and/or semantic constraints. While
adjective ordering in Arabic is governed by native speaker’s intuition,
emphasis shift and language usage (see 2.4.1, 2.4.2 and 2.9).
5.
All subjects used both semantic and communicative translations
with varying percentages. (24) instances (24%) were translated
semantically, where as (76) instances (76%) were translated
109
communicatively. This can be attributed to the fact that there is no
one-to-one correspondence between adjective ordering in English and
Arabic.
6.
Although there is, in principle, no syntactical upper limit to the
number of adjectives in premodification (see 2.4.2.20), it is unusual to
find more than six or seven adjectives in a sequence. But this finding
requires verification in the light of further data.
7.
Most adjective ordering patterns manifest a kind of relation
between form and proposition. In other words, the relation between
the noun phrase as a grammatical unit and the proposition of the unit
is formed by the relations holding between the adjectives themselves
and their head. To round off the argument, one can say that the
problem is procedural rather than structural.
8.
English native speaker’s performance does not always coincide
with Quirk et al’s model of ordering or other grammarians’ models
100%. There are some examples that clearly violate rigid patterning
and, hence a considerable variation. This variation is sometimes
governed by semantic and/or syntactic constraints (see 2.4.1 and
2.4.2).
109
9.
In English, the use of articles (definite and indefinite) are mutually
exclusive with the use of demonstrative pronouns, e.g.
1.
* These the two books.
2.
* This a pen.
While in Arabic the definite article ‘ ‫ ’الـ‬is not mutually exclusive with
the demonstrative pronoun, e.g.
‫هذان الكتابان‬
As for the indefinite articles in Arabic, one should say that Arabic has
no indefinite articles, but indefinite markers, e.g.
.‫كتابٌ قدي ٌم‬
(an old book)
.ُ‫قل ٌم جديد‬
(a new pen)
(see our data analysis 3-10).
10.
The noun phrase in English is richer (in number of modifiers)
than Arabic. In English more than five adjectives may occur in the
same noun phrase (see our examples 1-20 in chapter 3). While in
Arabic three or four adjectives can occur in the same noun phrase (see
2.9).
4.2. Recommendations:
On the basis of our findings and our conclusions, we put forward
the following recommendations:
1.
A translator is supposed to have a syntactic knowledge as well as a
semantic knowledge as a basis property for rendering any sequence of
adjectives. This syntactic and semantic competence requires, besides
other translational abilities, a comprehensive knowledge of adjectives
and their types and meanings.
110
2.
Translators, teachers of translation and students of translation
should be well-acquainted with the modification system in English
and Arabic.
3.
Translators, teachers of translation and students of translation
should be well-familiarized with basic translational procedures and
techniques.
4.
Since our proposed model has been well-studied, we urge all
translators in this area to adopt it in their renderings.
5.
Learners of English language can make use of our proposed model.
4.3. Suggestions for Further Research:
Although the present thesis is a comprehensive study; it cannot be
considered as a final one. It left the following tasks to be tackled for
further research.
1.
The translation of adjective ordering can be studied in different
genres such as literary texts, Glorious Qur’a:n, etc.
2.
A contrastive study of adjective ordering in English and Arabic can
be carried out.
3.
The translation of adjective ordering in Arabic into English can be
also conducted.
111
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abdulrazzaq, K. (1995). Loss in Poetry in Translation from English
into Arabic, (Unpublished M. A. Thesis), AlMustansiriyah University.
Al-Halawachy, A. A. I. (1999). Pragmatic Constraints on Adjective
Ordering in English, (Unpublished M.A. Thesis),
University of Mosul.
Al-Najjar, M. (1990). Translation and Syntax. Four Cross Linguistic
Translations Dogmas. Baghdad, Al-Mustansirya
Literary Review.
Al-Sulaimaan, M. D. (2002). “A Linguistic Study of Errors in the Use of
Articles Committed by Arabic-Speaking Students
at the English B. A. First-Year Level (University
of Mosul). In Adab Al-Rafidayn, Vol.35, pp.2350.
Armchair Grammarians (2002). Nouns (section two), http:/community-2.
Webster.net/solis-boo Grammar1/page3.html.
Bache, C. (1978). The Order of Premodifying Adjectives in PresentDay English, Odense: Odense University Press.
Bailey, K. M. (1975). The Ordering of Attributive Adjectives in
English: A Preliminary Study, (Unpublished
English 215 Paper), UCLA.
Bakir, S. N. (1995). A Contrastive Study of Adjectival Sequence in
English
and
Kurdish,
(Unpublished
Thesis), University of Salahuddin.
M.A.
112
Barkhudarov, L. (1993). The Problem of the Unit of Translation”. In
Zlateva, P. (ed. trans), Translation and Social
Action, pp.39-46.
Bathgate, R. H. (1981). “Studies of Translation Models 2: A Theoretical
Framework”. In: The Incorporated Liguist, 20/1,
pp.10-16.
Bauer, L. (1997). Order of Adjectives in English, Laurie.BAUER.ac.nz.
Berry, M. (1985). An Introduction to Systemic Linguistics, London: B.
T. Bastford.
Bishai, Wilson, B. (1971). Concise Grammar of Literary Arabic: A
New
Approach,
Debuque:
Kendall
Hund
Publication.
Bloomfield, L. (1933). A Grammar of the English Language, New
York: Henry Holt and Company.
Bolinger, D. (1972). Degree Words, The Hauge: Mouton.
Bornstein, D. (1976). Reading in the Theory of Grammar, Cambridge:
Winthrop Publishers.
British Council’s (2000). Bulletin, Internet, w.w.wbr.c.com.
British Royal’s (20003). Bulletin, Internet, w.w.wbr.r.com.
Brown, D. W.; Brown, W. C. and Bailey, D. (1958). Form in Modern
English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bühler, K. (1934). Sprachtheorie, Jena: Fischer.
Canney, J. F.; Goldberg, J. P. and O’cnnor (2002). Suffixes to Know,
http://
depts/gallaudet.edu/englishworks/reading
suffixes. html.
Catford, J. C. (1965). A Linguistic Theory of Translation, London:
OUP.
Chalker, S. (1984). Current English Grammar, London: Macmillan.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures, The Hague: Mouton.
113
_____________ (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT Press.
Christophersen, P. and Sandved, A. O. (1969). An Advanced English
Grammar, London: Macmillan.
Chung, S. and Pullum, G. (2002). Grammar, University of California.
http://www.sadc.org/chung pullum.html.
Clece-Murcia, M. and Larsen-Freeman, D. (1983). The Grammar Book:
An
ESL/EFL
Teacher’s
Course,
Rowely:
Newbury House Publishers.
Cliff, N. (1959). Adverbs as Multipliers: Psychological Review,
Chicago: CH.P.
Close, R. A. (1962). English as a Foreign Language, London: George
ALLen and Unwin.
Colchester English Study (1995). Internet, w.w.w.x.com.
Collins, W. (1990). Collins Cobuild English Grammar, London:
Cobuild.
Corder, S. P. (1960). An Introduction to English Practice Book,
London: Longman.
Crystal, D. (1971). Linguistics, Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
_________ (1985). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, London:
Andre Deutsch.
Darling, C. (2003). Position of Adjectives, Hartford, Connecticut. http://
webster.comment.edu/grammar/adjectives.html.
___________ (2003). The Royal Order of Adjectives, Capital
Community College, http://www.ccc.comm.net.
edu/grammar/adjectives. html.
de Beaugrande, R. (1978). Text, Discourse and Process, Norwood: N.J.
Ablex.
114
Diab, N. (1997). The Translation of Arabic in the English Writings of
Lebanese Students, the ESP, Sao Paolo, Vol.18n
1, 71-83.
Driven, R. (1999). The Cognitive for Adjective Sequences in
Attribution. Journal of English Study 1: 57: 67.
http://www. unirioja.es/publicaciones 01/art 04.
Drummond, G. (1972). English Structure Practice, London: Longman.
Eagles (2003). Linguistic Aspects, Adjective. Internet.
Eckersley, C. E. and Eckersley, J. M. (1960). A Comprehensive English
Grammar, London: Longman.
Eco, U. (1995). The Search for the Perfect Language. (Translated by
Fentress, J.). Oxford: Oxford Basil Blackwell.
English Language Centre (1999). Internet, w.w.w.w.en.l.cen.com
English Outlook (2001). Order of Adjectives, Internet, w.w.w.e.out.com.
Entwistle, J. W. (1951). Aspects of Language, London: 24 Russell.
Fathi, Y. (1986). Word Order in English and Arabic, (Unpublished
M.A. Thesis) Mosul University.
Feder, M. (2002). Parts of Speech: Adjectives, http://eslus.com/
lesson/GRAMMAR/pos/pos4.
Feigenbaum, I. (1985). The Grammar Handbook, Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
M. (2000). English Language, New Jersey: Piscataway.
Fowler, R. (1971). An Introduction to Transformational Syntax,
London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Francis, W. N. (1958). The Structure of American English, New York:
The Roland Press Company.
Fraser, J. (1996). "The Transaltor Investigated: Learning from Transaltion
Process Analysis". In: The Translator, 2/1, pp.6579.
115
Gentzler, E. (1993). Contemporary Translation Theories, London:
Routledge.
Greever, G. and E. Jones (1939). Country Collegiate Handbook, New
York: Appleton Century Company.
Haegeman, L.; Gueron, J. (1999). English Grammar: A Generative
Perspective, Oxford: Black Well.
Haggren, J. (2003). Position of Adjectives, http://www.ruthri/mi.net/hut/
hrlp/grammar-help/adjectives 2 html.
Hansard, M. (2003). Adjective or Adverb, Owl at Pur due University.
Hasselgard, H; Johansson, S. and Lysvag, P. (1999). Glossary of
Grammatical Terms Used in English Grammar,
http://fos.uio.no/hhasselg/terms httm # postmodifier.
Hatim, B. and Mason, I. (1990). Discourse and the Translator, London
and New York: Longman.
Hermans, T. (1995). “Toury’s Empiricism Version One: Review of
Gideon Toury’s In Search of a Theory of
Translation”. In: The Translator, 1:2, pp.215-223.
Hervey, S. and Higgins, I. (1992). Thinking Translation: A Course in
Translation
Method:
French
to
English,
London: Routledge.
Hetzron, R. (1978). “A Synthetic-Generative Approach to Language”. In:
Linguistics, 138:29-62.
Hill, A. A. (1958). Introduction to Linguistic Structures, New York:
Harcourt Brace and Company.
Hill, L. A. (1965). A Guide to Correct English, Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Hornby, A. S. (1976). Guide to the Patterns and Usage in English,
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
116
House, H. C. and Harman, S. E. (1931). Descriptive English Grammar,
New York: Prentice-Hall.
_________________________ (1936). Descriptive English Grammar,
New York: Prentice-Hall.
Huddleston, R. (1984). Introduction to the Grammar of English,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Humphreys, G. (1945). Teach Yourself English Grammar, London:
Newgate Street.
Hunte College Writing Center (1998). Grammar and Mechanics, http://
rwc.hunter.cung.edu/writing/on-line/adjective.html.
Jackendoff, R. (1977). X Syntax: A Study of Phrase Structure,
Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Jackson, H. (1982). Analyzing English, Wheaton and Co. Ltd.
Jakobson, R. (1966). “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation”. In Reuben
A. Brower (ed.) on Translation, pp. 232-239.
Joyce, J. (1914). Dubliners, London: Penguin.
Khalil, A. M. (1999). A Contrastive Grammar of English and Arabic,
Amman: Jordan Book Centre.
Kies, D. (1995). Modern English Grammar, http.//papyer.com/
hypertext book/eng–126/ph–adj.html.
Koller, W. (1992). “Equivalence in Translation Theory”. (Translated by
Chesterman, A.). In Chesterman, A. (ed.),
Readings in Translation Theory pp.99-104.
Krapp, G. (1948). The Elements of English Grammar, New York:
Charles Scribner’s Sons (2nd ed.).
Kremers, J. (2000). A Recursive Linearization Approach to Arabic
Noun Phrase, The Netherlands: University of
Nijmegen.
117
Kryston,
V.
(2002).
Adjective,
http://www.wonderfulwritingskil/
sunhandbook.com/index.html.
Kullenberg, H. (2003). Functions of Attributives in English, Internet,
http:/w.w.w.f.a.c.com.
Larson, R. K. (2000). Semantics of Adjectival Modification,
Amsterdam: Orleans Press.
Lawendowski, B. P. (1978). “On Seantic Aspects of Transaltion”. In
Sebeok, T. A. (ed.) Sight, Sound and Sense,
Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 264-282.
Levi, J. N. (1978). The Syntax and Semantics of Complex Nominals,
New York: Academic Press.
Linn-Benton Community College (1996). Adjectives, http://www.
linnbenton.edu.
Long R. B. and Long, D. R. (1971). English Grammar, Glenview: Scott,
Foresman and Company.
Ilyas, A. I. (1989). Theories of Translation: Theoretical Issues and
Practical Implications, Mosul: Mosul University
Press.
Louis Community College (2002). Dangling and Misplaced Modifiers,
http://www.stlcc.cc.mo.us/mc.support/cwc/fpages/
Dangling-Modifiers. html.
Low, O. (1966). A New Certificate of Proficiency English Course with
Practice and Test Papers, London: Butler and
Tanner.
Macfadyen, H. (1994). What is an Adjective? University of Ottawa.
http:/www.Uottawa.ca/academic/arts/wrticent/
hypergrammar/adjective.html.
118
Malouf, R. (2002). The Order of Prenominal Adjectives in Natural
Language, The Netherlands, Postbus 716: 9700
As Groningen.
Martin, J. E. (1969). “Some Competence-process Relationship in Noun
Phrases with Pre-nominal and Post-nominal
Ordering”. Journal of Verbal Learning and
Verbal Behaviour, pp.471-480.
McArthur, T. (1992). The Oxford Companion to the English
Language: Predicative Adjective. http://www.
xrefer.com/entry.jsp?xrefid=570393&secid=–hh1.
Mello, V. (1997). Adjective Order, The Internet TESL Journal.
Metric, M. (2000). Word Order in Sentences, http://www.say–it–in–
english.com/Lesson8.html.
Millet, B. (2003). Introduction to Traditional Grammar, Internet.
Mitchell, F. K. (1931). English Grammar for College Students. New
York: The Macmillan Company.
Morsberger, R. E. (1965). Commonsense Grammar and Style, New
York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company.
Moure, O. (2000). Word Order: Adverbs and Adjectives, http://www.
opmersonal.com.ar/firstcirtificate/wordorder. html.
Neil, R.; Duckworth, M. and Gude Kathy (1987). Success at First
Certificate, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Neubert, A. (1985). Text and Translation, Leipzig: VEB Verlag
Enzykloppadie.
____________ (1991). “Models of Translation". In Sonja TrikkonenCondit (ed.), pp.17-26.
The New English (2002). Internet, http/w.w.w.t.n.e.com.
Newmark, P. (1988a). Approaches to Translation, Hemel Hempstead:
Prentice Hall.
119
___________ (1988b). A Textbook of Translation, Hemel Hempstead:
Prentice Hall.
Nichols, A. E. (1965). English Syntax: Advanced Composition for
Non-Native Speakers, New York: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston.
Nida, E. A. (1995). “Dynamic Equivalence in Translating”. In Sin-Wai
Chan and David, E. P. (eds.), An Encyclopedia of
Translation, pp.223-230.
Nida, E. and Taber, C. R. (1982). The Theory and Practice of
Translation, Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Nord, C. (1991). Text Analysis in Translation, Amsterdam: Rodopi.
______ (1997). Translating as a Purposeful Activity Functionalist
Approaches Explained, Manchester: St. Jerome
Publishing.
Popovič, A (1970). “The Concept Shift of Expression in Transaltion
Analysis”. In Holmes, J. (ed.) The Nature of
Translation, The Hague: Mouton, pp.78-87.
__________ (1976). “Aspects of Meta text". In Canadian Review of
Comparative Literature, 3, pp.225-235.
Proceeding of the Twelfth West Coast Conference on Formal
Linguistics (WCCFL) (pp.439-454) Stanford, CA:
Linguistics Association, CSLI.
Putseye, Y. (1984). “Adjectives”. Pedagogical English Grammar, 3.
(Distributed by Linguistic Agency at the University
of Trier, D-5500 Trier).
Pym, A. (1992). Translation and Text Transfer: An Essay on the
Principles of Intercultural Communication,
Frankfurt and Main: Peter Lang.
120
Quirk, R.; Greenbaum, S.; Leech, G. and Svartivik, J. (1972). A
Grammar of Contemporary English, London:
Longman.
______________________________________(1985). A Comprehensive
Grammar
of
English
Language.
London:
Longman.
Radford, A. (1997). Syntax, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Radley, P. and Burke, K. (2003). How to Learn English, Neslon
English Language Teaching, Antimoon Team.
http://www.antimoon.com/how/input gram rules.
html.
Reis, K. and Vermer, H. J. (1989). Text Types, Translation Types and
Translation
Assessment
(translated
by
Chesterman, A.). In: Chetserman A. (ed.). pp.105115.
Roberts, P. (1964). English Syntax, New York: Harcourt, Brace and
World.
_________ (1965). Patterns of English, New York: Harcourt, Brace and
World.
Roberts, R. (1985). "Translation and Communication". In Nucleo, L.
Translation, pp.139-176.
Robin (2002). The Adjective, http://www.chompchom.com/terms/adjective .
html.
Robinson, Douglas (1991). The Translator's Turn, Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins.
Romine, J. S. (1958). Sentence Mastery, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
121
Sager, J. C. (1994). Language Engineering and Translation:
Consequences of Automation, Amsterdam and
Philadelphia:
John
Benjamins
Publishing
Company.
Scoala (2001). Lesson no.6, http://www.e-Scoala.or/engleza/lesson-no6.
html.
Sevenonius, P. (2003). The Structural Location of the Attributive
Adjective, University of California at Santa
Cruz.
Shoebottom, P.(2004). Adjectives, http://www.fis.edu/eslweb/index.html
Shuttleworth, M. and Cowie, M. (1999). Dictionary of Translation
Studies, Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
Shvester, A. D. (1993). “Equivalence and Adequacy”. In Zlateva, P. (ed.
Trans.). Translation of Social Action: Russian
and Bulgarian Perspectives, London: Routledge.
Sledd, J. (1959). A Short Introduction to English Grammar, Chicago:
Scott, Foresman and Co.
Snell-Hornby, M. (1991). "Translation Studies Art, Science or Utopia?"
In Van Leuven-Zwart, K. M. Naaijkens, T. (eds.),
Translation Studies, pp.13-23.
Spilka, I. (1978). "Translation in a Bilingual Situation". In McGill
Journal of Education, 14.2. pp.211-218.
Sturrock, J. (1991). "On Jakobson on Translation". In Seobeok, T. and
Umiker-Seobeok, J. (eds.). Recent Developments
in Theory and History, Pp.307-321.
Svatko, K. (1979). Descriptive Adjective Ordering in English and
Arabic, (Unpublished M.A. Thesis), TESL,
UCLA.
122
Swan, M. (1980). Practical English Usage, Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
_________ (1997). Adjective Order, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
The British Council (2000). Adjectives, http://www.learnenglish.org.UK/
grammar/archive/adjective-order.html.
The
English
Club
(1997).
English
Language,
http://help
center.englishclub.com-adjective-order.html.
The English Language Centre (1998). Adjective Order, http://web
zuvicca/elc/studyzone/grammar/adjord.html.
The Internet Grammar of English (1998). The Characteristics of
Adjectives, The Survey of English Usage, http://
www.uc/ac.uk/internet-grammat/adjective/xadjv7.
html.
The New Fowler’s Modern English Usage (2002). Adjective, Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
nion (1997). Rules Grammar Change, http:/www.theoniou.com/
onion3109/newgrammar.
Thomson, A. J. and Martinet, A. V. (1960). A Practical English
Grammar, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tillyer, D. (1998). Position of Adjective, Internet.
Toury, G. (1980). In Search of a Theory of Translation, Turku:
University of Turku.
________ (1995). Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond,
Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Company.
Umair (2003). Converting Gender in Noun and Adjectives, Maryknoll
sister. A:\Arabic class Notes. html.
123
University of Calgary, English Department (1999). Adjectives,
http://www.ucalgary.ca/uofc/eduweb/grammar/
course/speech/1-4a.html.
Vavra, E. (2002). Sliding Constructions, A:\Kiss Grammar Sliding
Construction. html.
Veit, R. (1986). Discovering English Grammar, Houghton, Mifflin
Company: Boston.
Vendler, Z. (1968). Adjectives and Nominalization, The Hague:
Mouton.
Venute, L. (1995). The Translator's Invisibility, London: Routledge.
Vinay, J. and Darbelnet, J. (1995). Comparative Stylistics of French
and English, Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John
Benjamins Publishing Company.
Wadensjo, C. (1995). “Dialogue Interpreting and the Distribution of
Responsibility”.
In
Hermes.
Journal
of
Linguistics, 14, pp.111-129.
Waldhorn, A. and Zeiger, A. (1967). English, Oxford: Heinemann
Professional Publishing.
Warren, B. (1984). Classifying Adjectives, Sweden: Minab/Gotab, Surte.
Weinhold, K. (2000). The Tongue United, A Guide to Grammar,
Punctuation and Style, http://grammar.uoregon/
adjectives.html.
Werner, R. (2002). Suffixes in English, Internet, w.w.w.suf.eng.com.
Wilss, W. (1994). “A Framework for Decision-Making in Translation”.
In Target. 6/2, pp.131-150.
‫‪124‬‬
‫مشكالت ترجمة ترتيب النعوت من‬
‫اإلنكليزية إلى العربية‬
‫رسالة تقدم بها‬
‫عارف عبدهللا سليم العاشور‬
‫إلى‬
‫مجلس كلية الآداب في جامعة الموصل‬
‫وهي جزء من متطلبات نيل شهادة‬
‫ماجستير آداب في الترجمة‬
‫بإشراف‬
‫األستاذ المساعد‬
‫الدكتور مصباح محمود داؤد السليمان‬
‫‪1425‬هـ‬
‫‪2004‬م‬
‫الخالصــــــــــة‬
‫ما زال ترتيب النعو ف العبا ار االسمية مثار النقاش ف اللغتين اإلنكليزية والعربية‪.‬‬
‫إذ يعتقد بعض النحويين بأن هنا ثمة قيود نحوية وداللية الت تتحكم بهتذا الترتيتب‪ .‬بينمتا يعتقتد‬
‫البعض اآلخر بأن حدس المتكلم بلغتة األم والتأكيتد علتى نعت‬
‫دون آختر واالستتخدام اللغتوي لهتذه‬
‫‪125‬‬
‫النعتتو يلعتتب دو اًر مهم تاً ف ت ذل ت ‪ .‬وغالب تاً متتا يجتتد المترجمتتون بعتتض الصتتعوبا‬
‫عنتتدما يرومتتون‬
‫ترجمة ترتيب هذه النعو ف العبا ار االسمية من اإلنكليزية إلى العربية‪ .‬ويعزى ذل إلتى تبتاين‬
‫النظام الوصف لألسماء وعدم وجود عالقة متكافئة بين النظامين ف اللغتين‪.‬‬
‫تهدف هذه الرسالة بصورة رئيسة إلى‪:‬‬
‫(‪ )1‬دراسة ترتيب النعو ف العبا ار االسمية ف اإلنكليزية والعربية‪.‬‬
‫(‪ )2‬تحديد بعض األنماط المختلفة لهذه التعابير ف بعض كتب النحو اإلنكليزي‪.‬‬
‫(‪ )3‬معرفة البنية التركيبية لمكافئاتها الترجمية ف العربية‪.‬‬
‫(‪ )4‬تبيان طريقة ترجمة هذه التعابير‪.‬‬
‫ولتحقيق األهداف المذكورة أعاله تفترض الدراسة ما يل ‪:‬‬
‫(‪ )1‬يواجتته مترجمتتو التعتتابير الوصتتفية الت ت تتضتتمن تعاقتتب عتتدد متتن النعتتو بعتتض المشتتكال‬
‫التركيبية‪.‬‬
‫(‪ )2‬ال توجد عالقة متكافئة بين النظام الوصف لألسماء ف اإلنكليزية والعربية‪.‬‬
‫(‪ )3‬ال توجد عالقة متكافئة بين ترتيب هذه النعو ف اإلنكليزية والعربية‪.‬‬
‫والختبتتار صتتحة الفرضتتيا‬
‫المتتذكورة آنفتاً حتتدد‬
‫التعابير من كتتب النحتو اإلنكليتزي وأعطيت‬
‫الد ارستتة عشترين نمطتاً متنوعتاً متتن هتتذه‬
‫هتذه األنمتاط إلتى خمستة مدرستين مستاعدين فت قستم‬
‫الترجمة‪ /‬كلية اآلداب‪ /‬جامعة الموصل بغية ترجمتها‪.‬‬
‫واهم النتائج الت توصل‬
‫إليها الدراسة ه ‪:‬‬
‫(‪ )1‬ال توجت ت تتد عالقت ت تتة متكافئت ت تتة بت ت تتين ترتيت ت تتب النعت ت تتو ف ت ت ت العبت ت تتا ار االست ت تتمية ف ت ت ت اإلنكليزيت ت تتة‬
‫والعربيتتة‪ .‬فف ت اإلنكليزيتتة نجتتد بتتأن هنتتا بعتتض القواعتتد النحويتتة والدالليتتة الت ت ت تتحكم بهتتذا‬
‫الترتيب‪ ،‬بينما نجد ف العربية بأن لحدس المتكلم والتأكيد على نع‬
‫دون اآلختر واالستتخدام‬
‫اللغوي لتعاقب هذه النعو لها دو اًر مهماً ف هذا الترتيب‪.‬‬
‫(‪ )2‬لقتتد استتتخدم المترجمتتون كلتتتا التتترجمتين‪ :‬الدالليتتة والتواصتتلية فت ترجمتتة هتتذه التعتتابير ولكتتن‬
‫بنسب مختلفتة‪ .‬إذ بلغت‬
‫التواصلية كان‬
‫(‪ )3‬استتتخدام أدوا‬
‫التملت ت فت ت ذا‬
‫‪.%76‬‬
‫نستبة استتخدام الترجمتة الدالليتة ‪ %24‬بينمتا نستبة استتخدام الترجمتة‬
‫التعريتتف والتنكيتتر ف ت اإلنكليزيتتة يمنعتتان استتتخدام أستتماء اإلشتتارة وضتتمائر‬
‫التركي تتب‪ .‬بينم تتا نج تتد فت ت العربي تتة أن اس تتتخدام أداة التعري تتف ال يمن تتع م تتن‬
‫استخدام أسماء اإلشارة‪ .‬وتفتقر اللغة العربية إلى أدوا‬
‫مثل التنوين‪.‬‬
‫وانته ت‬
‫بمزيد من الدراسا‬
‫التنكير لكنها تمتل محددا‬
‫الرستتالة بتتبعض النتتتائج وتقتتديم بعتتض المقترحتتا‬
‫المستقبلية‪.‬‬
‫التنكير‬
‫ألهتتداف تعليميتتة والتوصتتيا‬
126