* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download PROBLEMS OF ADJECTIVE SEQUENCING IN ENGLISH
Macedonian grammar wikipedia , lookup
Preposition and postposition wikipedia , lookup
Sanskrit grammar wikipedia , lookup
Junction Grammar wikipedia , lookup
Chinese grammar wikipedia , lookup
Untranslatability wikipedia , lookup
Serbo-Croatian grammar wikipedia , lookup
Modern Hebrew grammar wikipedia , lookup
Ukrainian grammar wikipedia , lookup
Scottish Gaelic grammar wikipedia , lookup
Old Norse morphology wikipedia , lookup
Compound (linguistics) wikipedia , lookup
Swedish grammar wikipedia , lookup
Latin syntax wikipedia , lookup
Sotho parts of speech wikipedia , lookup
Pipil grammar wikipedia , lookup
Lithuanian grammar wikipedia , lookup
Spanish grammar wikipedia , lookup
Portuguese grammar wikipedia , lookup
Romanian grammar wikipedia , lookup
Zulu grammar wikipedia , lookup
Malay grammar wikipedia , lookup
Modern Greek grammar wikipedia , lookup
Vietnamese grammar wikipedia , lookup
Literary Welsh morphology wikipedia , lookup
Turkish grammar wikipedia , lookup
Arabic nouns and adjectives wikipedia , lookup
Arabic grammar wikipedia , lookup
Russian grammar wikipedia , lookup
Determiner phrase wikipedia , lookup
Japanese grammar wikipedia , lookup
Ancient Greek grammar wikipedia , lookup
Dutch grammar wikipedia , lookup
Yiddish grammar wikipedia , lookup
Esperanto grammar wikipedia , lookup
English grammar wikipedia , lookup
French grammar wikipedia , lookup
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