Of University of Ljubljana FACULTYofARTS Acta Lingüistica Asiatica Year 2014, Volume 4, Number 3 Acta Linguistica Asiatica Year 2014, Volume 4, Number 3 Editors: Andrej Bekeš, Mateja Petrovčič, Nina Golob Editorial Board: Bi Yanli (China), Cao Hongquan (China), Luka Culiberg (Slovenia), Tamara Ditrich (Slovenia), Kristina Hmeljak Sangawa (Slovenia), Ichimiya Yufuko (Japan), Terry Andrew Joyce (Japan), Jens Karlsson (Sweden), Lee Yong (Korea), Lin Ming-chang (Taiwan), Arun Prakash Mishra (India), Nagisa Moritoki Škof (Slovenia), Nishina Kikuko (Japan), Sawada Hiroko (Japan), Chikako Shigemori Bučar (Slovenia), Irena Srdanovic (Japan). © University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts, 2014 All rights reserved. Published by: Znanstvena založba Filozofske fakultete Univerze v Ljubljani (Ljubljana University Press, Faculty of Arts) Issued by: Department of Asian and African Studies For the publisher: Branka Kalenic Ramšak, the Dean of the Faculty of Arts The journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported (CC BY 3.0). Journal's web page: http://revije.ff.uni-lj.si/ala/ The journal is published in the scope of Open Journal Systems ISSN: 2232-3317 Abstracting and Indexing Services: COBISS, dLib, Directory of Open Access Journals, MLA International Bibliography, Open J-Gate and Google Scholar. Publication is free of charge. Address: University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts Department of Asian and African Studies Aškerčeva 2, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia E-mail: nina.golob@ff.uni-lj.si (mateja.petrovcic@ff.uni-lj.si) Table of Contents Foreword .......................................................................................................................5 RESEARCH ARTICLES Deriving and Interpreting Ka(karimusubi) in Premodern Japanese Moreno MITROVIC.................................................................................................9-28 Assessing the Quality of Persian Translation of Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-four Based on House's Model: Overt-Covert Translation Distinction Hossein Heidani TABRIZI, Azizeh CHALAK, Amir Hossein TAHERIOUN.....29-42 Korean and Japanese as Chinese-Characters Cultural Spheres Takuya OKIMORI..................................................................................................43-70 Phonemic and Acoustic Analysis of Hindko Fricatives Haroon Ur RASHID, Abdul Qadir KHAN............................................................71-81 Japonski zapis slovenskih enozložnih izrek: transkripcija in fonološke omejitve pri prenosu glasovne podobe Nina GOLOB.........................................................................................................83-92 RESEARCH ARTICLES Deriving and Interpreting Ka(karimusubi) in Premodern JAPANESE Moreno MITROVIC1 University of Cambridge mm821 @cam.ac.uk Abstract This paper provides a new syntax and semantics for kakarimusubi (KM), a focus construction prominent in the grammar of Old Japanese (OJ) and Early Middle (Classical) Japanese (CJ), which diachronically developed into the interrogative construction in Modern Japanese (MdJ) headed by the ka particle. Adopting Chierchia & Caponigro's (2013) novel analysis of Free Relatives (FRs) as embedded interrogatives, an FR-based analysis of KM is proposed so as to obtain a compositional semantic analysis of this focus construction as well as an account of the adnominal marking of the presuppositional musubi component of this grammatical construction. Keywords: Old Japanese; syntax-semantics of focus; particles Povzetek Članek predlaga novo skladenjsko in pomenoslovno analizo kakarimusubi-ja, konstrukcije žariščenja, ki je bila prominentna slovnična značilnost v stari japonščini (OJ) ter zgodnjesrednji (klasični) japonščini (CJ) in katera se je diahrono razvila v vprašalno konstrukcijo, izraženo s členkom ka, v moderni japonščini (MdJ). Z usvojitvijo Chierchiove & Caponigrove (2013) nove analize prostih odvisnih stavkov (FR), po kateri so le-ti sestavljeni iz vprašalnih stavkov, predlagam analizo KM, zasnovano na FR, s katero dosežem sestavno-pomenoslovno analizo te konstrukcije žariščenja kot tudi analizo adnominalnega označevanja na predpostavnem musubi delu te slovnične sestave. Ključne besede: stara japonščina; skladnja/pomenoslovje žariščenja; slovnični delci 1 The existence of this paper is almost entirely due to the kind and helpful presence of John Whitman who introduced me to Old Japanese during my fellowship at the Naitonal Institute of Japanese Language and Linguistics, Tokyo. Edith Aldridge has provided very helpful and sobering commentary on an earlier draft of this paper. My thanks are also due to Bjarke Frellesvig and Kerri Russel and the rest of the Oxford Old Japanese researchers who have made their incredible corpus avalaible. Reearch reported here has received financial support from the British Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) no. AH/J500094/1, AHRC IPS fellowship grant no. MM821IPS, and the HRDSF grant no. 11010- 542/2011. Errors that remain are mine alone. Acta Linguistica Asiatica, 4(3), 2014. ISSN: 2232-3317, http://revije.ff.uni-lj.si/ala/ DOI: 10.4312/ala.4.3.9-28 1. Introduction This paper provides a novel analysis of the ka-marked kakarimusubi (KM) construction on both syntactic and semantic levels. I first review the synchronic syntactic status of KM in premodern Japanese and account for its diachronic decline in Section 2. Section 3 then translates the motivated syntactic structure into a formal semantic composition. The core analysis will hinge on Chierchia & Caponigro's (2013) novel analysis of Free Relatives (FRs) as embedded interrogatives. KM will be shown to involve the syntactic structure of a FR which is the derivational source of the adnominal marking on the musubi component. Section 4 concludes the discussion. 2. The syntax of kakarimusubi and its historical demise One of the most exotic and interesting gramamtical structures in OJ is the kakarimusubi (KM) construction. Translating as 'hanging-tying', KM, as Frellesvig (2010: 247) describes it, is a Japanese grammatical term for a specific focus construction, in which some constituent is marked by one of the 'kakari particles' and the core predicate it relates to is in a specific nominal form, rather than in the conclusive form generally used to conclude sentences. Given below is a simple, yet representative, example of KM, taken from Watanabe (2002: 181), where we underline the two crucial components: the co-occurrence of the ka (k) particle and the adnominal inflection on the verb.2 (i) m n m atami-taru twora ka poyu-ru iritated.stat tiger k roar-ADN 'Is it [an irritated tiger]F that is roaring?' (MYS 2.199) Frellesvig (2010: 249) elegantly equates kakarimusubi and the theme-rheme construction, which we show in Tab. 1, where topic and focus are seen as forming subtypes of kakarimusubi (theme-rheme). 2 We limit our analysis to &a-type KM only. For a wider empirical descriptions of the general phenomenon and recent syntactic analyses, see Whitman (1997); Serafim and Shinzato (2000); Wrona (2007), and the work cited therein. Table 1: KM as a theme-rheme super-construction . [SEGMENT] Kakari (theme) Musubi (rheme) [STRUCTURE] [INTERPRETATION] focus presupposition [FORM] headed by particle ka adnominal While prevalent in both OJ and CJ, the KM construction disappears from the language by the Edo period, i.e. by the beginning of the 17th century as previous diachronic research on the topic has shown (Serafim and Shinzato 2000: 82; Okimori 1989: 95-98). CJ prose, as Vovin (2003: 431) observes, boasted two interrogative particles: ya and ka, which forms the core point of interest in this paper. Ikeda (1975) notes that the ka particle expresses a question aimed at the speaker himself, while the particle ya expresses a question directed at the addressee. Vovin (2003) has subsequently shown that recent investigations of CJ grammar invalidate Ikeda's (1975) original generalisation. While ka may express self-addressing and rhetorical questions, it also expresses questions aimed at the addressee. Same has been shown to hold of the ya particle. On a more morphosyntactic level, ya occurs exclusively in polar questions, while ka tends to be used (not exclusively, however) in combination with wMnterrogatives.3 (2) Traditional view on the time course of the change (Watanabe 2002: 182) gradual loss of kakari-musubi 6 S so 3 This usage of ka in combination with wh-phrases, has been observed by Tokieda (1954) and has subsequently received excellent formal diachronic treatments by Watanabe (2002) and, especially, Aldridge (2009). The particle ka, all up until the 17th century, is an exclusive feature of the KM construction, which has an inherently focal semantics. We plot in (2) the time of loss of the KM construction, taken from Watanabe's (2002) work. The synchronic affinity between focus and interrogativity has been recognised since, at least, Erteschik-Shir (1986), who argued for the idea that the wh-phrase in a wh-question functions as the focus of the question. This idea, in light of KM, lends itself to a diachronic analysis of Old and Classical Japanese ka which underwent a change from being a focus operator, combining with wh-terms, to a question operator. We state this diachronic hypothesis in a more formal term in (3) using a(n mterpretable) feature notation (Chomsky 1995, et seq., inter. al.). (3) OJ/CJ: ka [iFOC] >> Post-CJ/MdJ: ka [iQ] Evindence in (4) demonstrates that OJ ka was not originally a question particle since interrogative meaning may obtain without ka-marking. We reiterate Aldridge's (2009) arguments againsts an interrogative analysis below. 'What should we do now?' (MYS 14.3418, l. 5; from Aldridge 2009: 550) The focus particle ka, as Watanabe (2002: 183) notes, had no restriction to host wh-terms in the OJ period (8th c.) since ka was able to host a non-wh-phrase. It was Nomura (1993a, b) who first examined the ordering restriction on the placement of ka within the clause in OJ (MYS), clearly showing that there was a fixed position for the placement ka, with regards to other grammatical markers of topichood (fa) and subjecthood (no/ga). This line of reseach has shown that ka and its host are restricted to a position following the topic marker fa but preceding (>) the no/ga-marked subject. Listed in Tab. 2 are Nomura's results as refined by Wrona (2007: 3), who shows several problems with the statistical analysis that Nomura (1993a, b) made and Watanabe (2002) adopted. (4) &rn »^w ima-fa ikani now-TOP how se-mo do-SUPP.ADN Table 2: The relative order of ka-phrases in MYS (p <0.005) as per Nomura (1993b, a) and Wrona (2007) . token # XP-ka > subject-no/ga 15 GENITIVE SUBJECT 1 subject-no/ga > XP-ka XP-ka > subject-fa 1 TOPICALISED SUBJECT 18 subject-fa > XP-ka The data in Tab. 2, stemming from Nomura (1993a, b), motivate a generalisation according to which ka-marked constituents generally follow fa-marked topics and precede genitive subjects, which we adopt from Aldridge (2009) and provide in (5). (5) NOMURA'S GENERALISATION (Aldridge, 2009: 557): XP-fa ...YP-ka ...DP-GEN ...V-ADN Watanabe (2002) thus proposed, and reiterated in Watanabe (2005), an analysis of high wh-movement to [Spec, FocP], where Foc may well stand for our k head, where he located the k head in the left-peripheral position of the clause. Given the evidence in Tab. 2, the partial syntax of OJ CP is the one in (12). In line with Whitman (2001), and indeed Kayne (1994: 143, fn. 3), we take the OJ genitive no/ga markers to be exponents of T0 and the topic marker fa to be the realisation of Top0. (6) Clausal left periphery in OJ: TopP Top" fa Instead of an analysis according to which the wh-terms target a high focus position above the TP (6) as originally proposed by Watanabe (2002), Aldridge (2009) refines the analysis and proposes to treat the wh-movement as targeting a low focus position, as indicated in (7b), instead of a high focus position (7a). The Foc head in (7a) and (7b) corresponds to our k label. (7) a. HIGH FOCUS MOVEMENT [TopP XP Top [focP YPwh Foc [tp DPgen ... ] ] ] b. LOW FOCUS MOVEMENT [TopP XP Top [tp DPgen [focP YP wh Foc [vP DPgen ... ] ] ] Aldridge (2009: 551) shows that genitive subjects, unlike nominative subjects residing in [Spec, TP], are rather better analysed as residing in their base-generated position in [Spec, vP], which additionally allows for a TP-internal landing site for wh-movement. Aldridge (2009: sec. 3) additionally shows that, other than the topic-marked (fa), syntactic material may precede the wh-elements, which a high-movement analysis (Watanabe 2002, 2005) does not predict and which, in fact, severley compromises the analysis according to which wh-movement targets a high left-peripheral position. Consider (8) taken from Aldridge (2009: 555). (8) u^mmn [^ )««] ¿n pototogisu [tukwi tatu made-ni] nani ka ki-naka-nu cuckoo.NOM [moon rise before-DAT] why k come-sing-NEG 'Why does the cuckoo not come to sing [before the moon rises]?' (MYS 17.3983, ll. 3-5; from Aldridge 2009: 555) Even scrambled objects, assumed to target the edge of TP (McGinnis 1999; Miyagawa 2001, 2003, 2005) appear in a position preceding the K-wh-phrase, as Aldridge further demonstrates. In (9), the wh-phrase is shown to follow both the scrambled object, residing in [Spec,TP], and an adverb located in a position higher than the high wh-movement analysis would predict. (9) » rn&rn m n m MUkRM [tune sira-nu miti no nagate] wo kurekure-to ika-ni [normally know-NEG road GEN journey]ACC in-dark how-DAT ka yuka-mu k go-SUPP ' How should I proceed in the dark on a journey on a road I normally do not know?' (MYS 5.888a, ll. 1-4; from Aldridge 2009: 555) Regarding the question that intrigues us most here, namely the synchronic and diachronic status of morphosyntactically encoded interrogativity, Aldridge (2009: 561) recognises that the k particle had no interrogative force whatsoever, since (semantically) its function seems to have operated a focus-sensitivity role alone and (syntactically) its position, as Aldridge (2009) convincingly shows, is far lower for it to attain interrogative scope. Instead, she proposes that the mechanism of interrogative scope-taking is unselective binding for, at least, two reasons: (a) wh-items can appear inside islands, as Whitman (2001) first observed; and (b) wh-words function as indefinite variables.4 What we do know, and demonstrate below, is that k developed its interrogative semantics and high syntactic position in the later periods, namely after the 14th century. Takamiya (2005) first observed the constant diachronic rise of the (indirectly) interrogative function of the ka particle, which we list in Tab. 3 and plot in Fig. 1. See also Kinuhata and Iwata (2009) for a diachronic analysis. Table 3: Diachrony of questions with ka (#>) in Japanese (Takamiya, 2005). century 14th 15th 17th 18th 18-20th 19th 20th #of tokens 1 9 31 23 34 40 121 Figure 1: Diachrony of ka-marked indirect questions in Japanese _ 14 15 16 17 18 19 century Indirect questions Also note that both mo another prominent OJ particle, and ka (k) may co-occur simultaneously, which obtains a kakarimusubi-like construction featuring both an 4 A variable treatment of wh-terms in OJ is also defended in Mitrovic (2014: ch. 5). interrogative and a focus meaning. Since k did not encode for interrogativity, we assume this is done by a silent Q-operator. The following two examples show the co-occurrence of mo and ka (k) particles. (10) mw az m mrnrn Nani-wo-ka-mo mikari=no fito-no ori-te kazasa-mu what-ACC-K + ^ hunt-GEN person-GEN pick-CONJ wear.on.hair-MOD.ADNOM 'What should the hunters pick and wear on their hair?' (MSY 10.1974, ll. 3-5; Aldridge 2009: 550) (11) (ww ^^^ am w« nu ika-ni ara-mu pi-no toki-ni ka-mo kowe sira-mu how-DAT be.MOD day-GEN time-DAT k + ^ voice know-MOD itmm it&n m inn is^^to pito-no piza-no pe wa-ga makuraka-mu person.GEN knee.GEN on 1S-NOM rest.head-SUPP 'On the day which will be like what will I rest my head on the knee of someone who understands me?' (MYS5.810; Aldridge 2009: 560) We therefore slightly rearticulate Nomura's generalisation so as to include the particle ^ (mo) as being in a fixed position. (See Mitrovic 2014 for details.) (12) Clausal left periphery in OJ (articulated): In Tab. 4, we list occurrences and types of particle composites in OJ as found in MYS. The fact that mo and ka occur in rather fixed positions confirms our conjecture of rearticulating Nomura's generalisation as stated in (12). Table 4: The relative order of ka-phrases in MYS (p <0.005) as per Nomura (1993b, a) and Wrona (2007). particle sequence # of tokens ka mo ka mo 2 mo ka mo ka 0 mo ka mo 9 mo ka 60 mo ga 1 ga mo 3 ka mo 154 ga mo ga 0 ga mo ga mo 0 mo ga mo ga 0 Given Aldridge's (2009) evidence of the low position of kP, we simply relocate the kP-^P phrase couple to a lower position, along the lines of Aldridge's (2009) original proposal. (13) LOW FOCUS MOVEMENT (rearticulated) [TopP Top [tp DPnom [focp Foc1=ka [focp Foc1=mo [vP DPgen ] ] ] ] ] In CJ, the ka-mo particle composite was lost, as Frellesvig (2010: 241) convincingly shows, which parallels our diachronic analysis, stated in (14), according to which k underwent eventual structural reanalysis from a lower pre-verbal TP-internal position to a higher CP-internal position. (14) a. OJ/CJ: >> b. post-CJ/MdJ Semantically, the change is from a focus-sensitive to an interrogative operator. Conceptually, both focus and interrogative constructions share an alternative-semantic core in that they both raise alternatives. Technically, the focus hosts of OJ/CJ k are generally DPs—predominantly, wh-words, as we have been exploring. The interrogative k in the post-classical period is confined to propositional hosts. While focus-alternatives are type-ambivalent and contextually determined, polar question alternatives are type-fixed, i.e. confined to propositional types (s,t) and inherently binary. In the next section, we motivate a syntactic structure for KM along with a compositional semantics. 3. A compositional analysis of kakarimusubi In this section, we review and adopt the recent proposal by Chierchia and Caponigro (2013) according to which free relatives (FRs) are derived from questions (Qs). We show that this account lends itself to an analysis of KM, which we have already overviewed. Before we move onto the two points of interest and application, let us first review Chierchia and Caponigro's (2013) derivation. 3.1 Setting up the formal system: questions and free relatives The idea that relative and question expressions share a interrogative core is put forth up by Chierchia and Caponigro (2013), whom we follow so as to derive the K-marked KM. Chierchia and Caponigro (2013) adopt a loose variant of Cecchetto and Donati's (2010) approach to free relatives and labelling, according to which interrogative and relative constructions share a common syntax, modulo the label of the root, on which the interpretation hinges. Take (15), taken from Cecchetto and Donati (2010), where the labelling algorithm at the root of the tree cannot readily determine a label (A) for the structure since the tree is essentially a set containing two subsetssets: (a:?(a:d what} (the wh-term in [Spec, CP]) and {a:c CP}} (the CP without its left edge). (15) Cecchetto and Donati's (2010) labellability of Qs vs. FRs: There is a theoretically presupposed idea in treating the Q/FR distinction, namely that they share a derivationally identical structure, modulo the final label, which is determined structure-externally, i.e. c-selectionally. In broad terms, if a head a merges above and combines with ?P in (15), ?P projects/labels as [C] if a subcategorises for [uC]; alternatively, if a subcategorises for [uD], ?P projects the [D] label as provided by what in [Spec,?P].5 Chierchia and Caponigro (2013) thus build on this idea that relatives, such as Mary ate what John cooked, are structurally—and thus interpretationally—embedded interrogatives. Note that this departs from traditional analyses, both syntactically, where relativisation is completely independent from interrogativity, as well as semantically, 5 The subcategorisation is notated using Mninterpretable categorial features ([uC]), as per minimalist assumptions (Chomsky 1995) briefly laid out in the previous section. where the traditional view maintains that clauses with wh-terms are traditionally seen as property- or set-denoting ^-abstracts, as per Groenendijk and Stokhof (1983) and that there exist two distinct semantic shift of the (presumably homophonous) denotation of the wh-term. One type shift—TS1 in (16)—lifts the wh-term to the level of propositions, yielding a question. The other type shifting operation—TS2 in (16)—lowers the type of the wh-term to an e-type, presumably via an i-operator (Partee 1987, inter. al.), yielding a FR. The following scheme in (16), taken from Chierchia and Caponigro (2013: 2, ex. 4), shows the traditional semantic split in the denotation of wh-terms. (16) The traditional approach to the denotation of wh-abstracts: We will follow their work and apply it to the Japonic construction of KM. To do so, we expand the syntactic inventory of Chierchia and Caponigro's (2013) theory and attempt a syntactic/semantic derivation and interpretation of the of partially interrogative focus in pre-modern Japonic. Before proceeding to the two sets of data and analyses, let us briefly expound on Chierchia and Caponigro's (2013) theory so as to understand the core motivations and technical building blocks of their system. Empirically, Chierchia and Caponigro (2013) draw their motivation from an empirical generalisation, dubbed Caponigro's generalisation, taken from Chierchia and Caponigro (2013: 2, ex. 3) (17) CAPONIGRO'S GENERALISATION (Caponigro 2003, 2004) If a language uses the wh-strategy to form both Qs and FRs, the wh-words found in FRs are always a subset of those found in Qs. Never the other way around. Never some other arbitrary relation between the two sets of wh-words. Let us now turn to Chierchia and Caponigro's (2013) derivation of questions, which they build from a list of lexical entries in (18). The composition and interpretation is follows standard assumptions, modulo the excorporation of the question-forming head (C0[+q]) from a clause head-complex. With respect to this mechanical move, Chierchia and Caponigro's (2013) adopt Shimada's (2007) head-unfolding model, which we will briefly introduce below. While C0[+q] creates a protoquestion, as assumed by Kartunnen (1977), and many others subsequently, it is simultaneously the element that derives the actual interrogative meaning. The common assumption is that C0[+q] cannot be interpreted in situ and so it must be merged at the root of the CP. The derivation and interpretation of FR relies on the same building blocks, namely the excorporation of an operator from within the clause-head complex. The derivational difference between Qs and FRs, as we have observed in (15) on independent (labelling) grounds, following Cecchetto and Donati (2010), lies in the label of the CP (or ?P). Under Shimada's (2007) assumptions, the label is not determined CP-externally but rather CP-internally, by virtue of head-unfolding. For Chierchia and Caponigro (2013), the difference between Qs and FRs lies in the probing mechanism, i.e. whether it is a Q-forming or a FR-forming operator that excorporates from the clause-head complex. In their analysis of FRs, the excorporating head is a nominal operator, which Chierchia and Caponigro (2013) dub D rel. In the system we are adopting, Drel functions as a nominal operator that extracts the Topical Property (ToPr) out a clause. TP is, in turn, defined as a singleton property of a question. This latter definition of TP, which underlies the notion of Drel, thus relies on answerhood conditions, for which Chierchia and Caponigro (2013) adopt a Dayal-style Ans(werhood) operator. In (18), we provide the definitions of the three interdependent operators. Additionally definable is the short-asnwerhood operator (AnsS), since all questions have short answers, which Chierchia and Caponigro (2013) take to be the very extractable property that Drel delivers. Hence, Drel denotes a (or rather the) short answer to a question (18d-i) or a type-lifted variant thereof in form of a generalised quantifier (GQ), as per (18d-ii). (18) a. [Ans]w(0=rpeQ[pw AVqeQq^pcq]] b. [AnsSF(0 = ix[[T0PR]w(x)] c. i. [TOPR] = lP{s,{e,t))VwVx[Pw(x) ~ lw'[Pw(x) = Answ(Q)]] ii. [[TOPR](0 = iPVwVx[Pw(x) ~ WPw'(x) = Answ(Q)]] d. i. [Drel]w(Q) = [AnsS]w(0 ii. [Drel]w(® = ^P3x[[ToPR(0]w A Pw(x)] For (18d-ii), however, the definition of Ans as it currently stands in (18c-i) will not suffice, hence a type-lowered variant of (18c-i) is given in (18c-ii). While Chierchia and Caponigro (2013) do not discuss the syntactic nature of the input to semantic interpretation, which obtains the two differential LFs for questions and free relatives, we now turn to the syntactic input of such LFs. While the syntactic origin of D(rel) as head-sister of C0 is stipulation in Chierchia and Caponigro's (2013) system, we reconcile this by adopting an articulated structure of C0. We do so by adopting Rizzi's (1997) left-peripheral microscopy of the clause. Recall from (18) that both the AnsS and the Drel operators ontologically rest on and are built from the ToPR element. It is my proposal here to locate the structural locus of ToPR in one of the two of Rizzi's (1997) Topic heads. I propose we treat the C-complex, the structure of which, and indeed the movement from which, yields the differential interpretation, in the following way. Assuming a rich micro-structure of the C head, following Rizzi (1997), we locate the different heads within the left periphery and assign them the semantic potential to yield as calculated meanings the entires in (18). Before implementing the proposal, we additionally extend our proposal by adopting Shimada's (2007) model of head movement. A phrase-structural spine, like the one of a CP which can be represented as in (19a), is traditionally built in a bottom-to-top fashion. Shimada (2007) convincingly argues for the derivational procedure that is primarily the inverse of (19a) and 'unfolds' to a structure like the one in (19a) through successive excorporation (19b). The specific steps of the 'unfolding' steps are given in (19b-i) through (19b-iii).6 We do not go into any greater detail of Shimada's (2007) proposal; the reader is instead referred to the original work (Shimada 2007), or its application in Chierchia & Caponigro (2013) and Mitrovic (2014: ch. 2). (19) a. [cp C [tp T [vp v [vp V ]]]] b. [v V [v v [t T [c C ]]]] > [cp C [tp T [vp v [vp V ]]]] i. [v V [v v [t T [c C ]]]] > [[v v [t T [c C ]]] [v V tv1]] ii. [[v v [T T [c C ]]] [V V tv1]] > [[t T [c C ]] [[v v tT2] [v V tv1]]] iii. [[t T [c C ]] [[v v tT2] [v V tv1]]] > [[c C ][[t T tc3] [[v v tT2] [v V tv1]]]] We take the same excorporational procedure to extend to the articulated clausal projection, as per Rizzi's original fine-grained view of the left periphery (LP), which we state in original in (20a). Upon 'head unfolding' (20b), the LP takes the shape of (20a). Under this analysis (extended to the clausal LP), another options makes itself available technically, i.e, the availability of inconsistent excorporation of the last head complex containing (a:tgp Top0, Force0}. 6 We subscript traces (t) of movement with numerals which should be read procedurally as denoting succesccive steps of excorporation. The terminal heads in (19b-iii) are given in bold for clarity. (20) a. Rizzi's (1997) take b. Rizzi's (1997) LP on the finegrained LP: derived in line with imada (2007): ForceP jO It seems reasonable to assume that while the full LP head-set unfolds, in line with Shimada's (2007) derivational assumptions, not all LP heads may be interpretationally active. Under the assumption that the richness of the LP is universally present, in one form or another, then conceptually, an inactive head may simply make no contribution. The inactivity can be stated in terms of F-valuation: non-locally through long-distance probing of a LP head within the clausal interior (e.g. in situ focus association, or topic); or, locally via [EPP]-like driven movement to specifiers of respective LP heads. If a LP head does not enter into any checking relation with an element within the clausal interior, a head can be said to be inactive. Semantically, inactive heads are ignored at LF, or are assigned identity function meaning so as to not make any meaningful (or at least pragmatically enriching) contribution. For convenience, we ignore the specifier slots and the recursivity notation of Topic projections that Rizzi (1997) states, and translate IP into TP since nothing will hinge on these modifications. Semantically, we propose that the ToPr is part of the meaning of the high Topic head, i.e. [ToPr] e [Top0]. The (potentially) non-exhaustive meaning of the Top head is taken to be Drel. The reasons for height preference will become clear below. Derivationally, we are concerned with the unfolding of heads up to the last point, when the C-head complex contains the high Topic head and the Force head ({a:tgp Top0, Force0}, cf. 20b), the former encoding for topicality (ToPr, under our assumption), the latter for interrogativity. Given the need for the protoquestion (PQ) operator for the calculation of of both Q and FR meanings, itself of type ((s,t)t), we stipulate its (syntactically silent) placement in the LP, such that the following structural hierachy obtains: Force0 ) Top0 ) PQ ) Foc0.7 Given the type mismatch of the head-complex containing {Top0, Force0}, one of the heads moves out of the complex and is interpreted at the root, as per (21). (21) The head adjacency follows from Shimada's (2007) model applied to Rizzi's (1997) dissection of the clause. We gain two advantages: firstly, the syntactic ontology of DREL is no longer a stipulation as we are identifying it as Top0. Secondly, Rizzi's (1997) LP provides a head-adjacent relation between (the high) Top and Force by virtue of the head unfolding derivational procedure of Shimada (2007). This way, we maintain, in slightly more syntactically technical terms, Chierchia and Caponigro's (2013) assumption that selection and excorporation of the second operator—C vs. DREL—is in fact a matter of Agree relation. 3.2 Interpreting kakarimusubi from Focus and FR We return to the case in hand, namely the derivation and compositonal interpretation of kakarimusubi, the data of which we briefly restate below in (22) from (1). (22) m ^ m atami-taru twora ka poyu-ru iritated.STAT tiger k roar-ADN 'Is it [an irritated tiger]F that is roaring?' (MYS 2.199) 7 Although this is a stipulation, all classical semantic theories of the composition of questions assume it implicitly, hence the syntactic nature of PQ does not constitute any controversies here. Our analysis of kakarimusubi will rely on the technical foundations of Chierchia and Caponigro (2013) and the results of Aldridge (2009). We take the musubi component of the construction, i.e. the presupposed content morphosyntactically marked with adnominal morphology, i.e. -ru in (22), to share the FR syntax and semantics as we have developed it. The kakari component results from movement of a segment contained within the vP to [Spec,KP], itself a slot in the left periphery of the vP, as Aldridge (2009) has independently motivated. Under the present analysis, the adnominal marker is an exponent of the (semantically nominal) Top0, hence movement of the remnant vP material—poyu-'roar(ing)' in (22)—to its specifier position results in pronunciation of the specifier and head as an adnominally marked verbal element (poyu+ru). The focus-associating k-marked DP then remnant-moves to the root of the clause. We further adopt Whitman's (1997) analysis of KM as a cleft-like construction. Under a cleft-approach of Whitman (1997), the presupposition of the musubi constituent comes for free. (Delin, 1992) Given the biclausal nature of clefts, we take the kP subsequently to move successive cyclically across the clause boundary into the higher CP, which also contributes the interrogative meaning. The derivation of our exemplar case in (22) is therefore the one given in (23). For simplicity, we ignore the copies from the internal structure of the moved material. We also make use of dashed nodes to ignore the intermediate projections that are not necessarily relevant to the derivation. Terminals on sites of pronunciation are marked in bold. (23) CP Under this analysis, the interpretation of the lower clause, containing (and denoting) the musubi presuppositional component of the proposition is the same as the interpretation of a FR under Chierchia and Caponigro's (2013) analysis. The association with focus takes place in the higher clause, which also, at least in the case of (23), encodes the interrogative meaning. The interpretation of the lower clause (CP;0w), turned into a DP along the lines explored above, is thus a presuppositional FR, while the higher CP involves a K-headed focus construction and a question, as shown in (24).8 (24) a. [CPw] = AP3x[x = ix[ROAREDw(x)] A Pw(x)] b. ICPhigh \ C[+q]] = EXH[D](p) = pAVq 6 Alt(p)[[p hq] ^ -q], where p = 3x[x = ix[ROAREDw(x)] A IRITATED -TIGERw(x)] c. [CPhigh:[+Q]] = ^q[EXH(p) = q V EXH(p) = -q], where p = ^w3x[x = ix[ROAREDw(x)] A IRITATED-TIGERw(x)] Recall also the fact that KM was lost in the post-classical period, when the interrogative function of the K-particle enters the language. This also shows the diachronic interlock between interrogative and cleft-like focus constructions involving FRs in an elegantly compatible way. We leave, however, the details of the diachronic procedures which gave rise to grammaticalised interrogativity of ka for further research. 4. Conclusion This paper has entertained a novel analysis of KM. We first reviewed the synchronic status of its syntax, noting the details of its diachronic decline from 12th through 17th centuries. (Watanabe 2002). Following Aldridge (2009), int. al., we have identified a sub-clausal and pre-verbal syntactic position for the focus-sensitive ka-particle. In Section 3, we have attempted a mapping from syntax onto compositional semantics so as to derive the compositional interpretation of the KM. Having adopted Chierchia & Caponigro's (2013) analysis of FRs as embedded interrogatives, we proposed that the adnominality marking on the musubi presuppositional component has its exponential locus in the higher Top0 nucleus of Rizzi's (1997) left-periphery system. Primary source MYS Man'yoshu. ca. 759 AD. Text edition as per Frellesvig et al. (2014). 8 The assumption underlying the computation of focus semantics in (24) is the inherently exhaustive constribution of Focus (derived by the EXH-operator). For details on the EXH-based account, see Chierchia (2013). References Aldridge, E. (2009). Short wh-movement in Old Japanese. In Iwasaki, S., Hoji, H., Clancy, P., and Sohn, S., editors, Japanese/Korean Linguistics, volume 17, pages 549-563. Stanford, CA: CSLI. Caponigro, I. (2003). Free Not to Ask: On the Semantics of Free Relatives and Wh-Words Cross-linguistically. PhD thesis, UCLA. Caponigro, I. (2004). The semantic contribution of Wh-words and type shifts: Evidence from free relatives crosslinguistically. In Young, R. B., editor, Proceedings of SALT 14, pages 38-55. Ithaca, NY: CLC Pub- lications, Cornell University. Cecchetto, C. and Donati, C. (2010). On labeling: Principle C and head movement. Syntax, 13(3):241-278. Chierchia, G. (2013). Logic in Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Chierchia, G. and Caponigro, I. (2013). Questions on questions and free relatives. Paper presented at Sinn und Bedeutung 18. Handout accessible at Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Dayal, V. (1996). Locality in Wh-Quantification: Questions and Relative Clauses in Hindi. Dordrecht, Kluwer. Delin, J. (1992). Properties of it-cleft presupposition. Journal of Semantics, 9:179-196. Erteschik-Shir, N. (1986). Wh-questions and focus. Linguistics and Philosophy, 9(2): 117-149. Frellesvig, B. (2010). A History of the Japanese language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Frellesvig, B., Horn, S. W., Russell, K. L., and Sells, P. (2014). The Oxford Corpus of Old Japanese. Electronic publication, accessible at http://vsarpj. orinst.ox.ac.uk/corpus. Groenendijk, J. and Stokhof, M. (1983). Studies in the semantics of questions and the pragmatics of answers. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam. Ikeda, T. (1975). Classical Japanese Grammar Illustrated with Texts. Tokyo: Töhö Gakkai. Kartunnen, L. (1977). Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy, 1:1-44. Kayne, R. (1994). The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Kinuhata, T. and Iwata., M. (2009). [Ka no tayosei o otte/pursuing the diversity of ka]. Ms. Osaka University. McGinnis, M. (1999). Evidence for feature-driven A-scrambling. In Bird, S., Carnie, A., Haugen, J., and Norquest, P., editors, WCCFL 18 Proceedings, pages 364-378. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Mitrovic, M. (2014). Morphosyntactic atoms of propositional logic: aphilo-logicalprogramme. PhD thesis, University of Cambridge. Miyagawa, S. (2001). The EPP, scrambling, and Wh-in-situ. In Kenstowicz, M., editor, Ken Hale: A Life in Language, pages 293-338. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Miyagawa, S. (2003). A-movement scrambling and options without optionality. In Karimi, S., editor, Word Order and Scrambling, pages 177-200. Oxford: Blackwell. Miyagawa, S. (2005). EPP and semantically vacuous scrambling. In Sabel, J. and Saito, M., editors, The Free Word Order Phenomenon, pages 181-220. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Nomura, T. (1993a). Jödaigo no no to ga nitsuite (ge). Kokugo Kokubun, 62(703):30-49. Nomura, T. (1993b). Jödaigo no no to ga nitsuite (jö). Kokugo Kokubun, 62(702):1-17. Okimori, T. (1989). 0 ^ M ^ [Nihongoshi], Tokyo: Ofusha. Rizzi, L. (1997). The fine structure of the left periphery. In Haegman, L., editor, Elements of Grammar, pages 281-337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Partee, B. (1987). Noun Phrase Interpretation and Type-Shifting Principles. In J. Groenendijk, D. de Jongh and M. Stokhof, editors, Studies in Discourse Representation Theory and the Theory of Generalized Quantifiers, pages 115-144. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Serafim, L. A. and Shinzato, R. (2000). Reconstructing the proto-japonic kakari musubi, . . . ka . . . -(a)m-wo. "hMW^ [Gengo Kenkyu], 118:81-118. Shimada, J. (2007). Head Movement, Binding Theory, and Phrase Structure. Unpublished monograph. MIT. Takamiya, Y. (2005). [kakujoshi o tomonawanai ka no kansetsu gimonbun ni tsuite. [on indirect questions of ka without case particles]]. H fi ^ ^ 0 ^ M ^ ^ ^ [Mie Daigaku Nihongogaku bungaku], 16:92-104. Tokieda, M. (1954). 0 ^ ^ ^ M M [Nihon bunpo, Bungo hen]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten. Vovin, A. (2003). A Reference Grammar of Classical Japanese Prose. London: Routledge. Watanabe, A. (2002). Loss of overt wh-movement in Old Japanese. In Lightfoot, D. W., editor, Syntactic Effects of Morphological Change, pages 179-195. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Watanabe, A. (2005). btft [Minimarisuto Puroguramu Josetsu: Seisei Bunpo no Aratana Chosen]. Tokyo: Taishukan. Whitman, J. (1997). Kakarimusubi from a comparative perspective. In Sohn, H. and Haig, J., editors, Japanese/Korean Linguistics, volume 6, pages 161-178. Stanford, CA: CSLI. Whitman, J. (2001). Kayne 1994: p. 143, fn. 3. In Alexandrova, G. M. and Arnaudova, O., editors, The Minimalist Parameter, Current issues in Linguistic Theory, pages 77-100. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Wrona, J. (2007). Non-movement and kakarimusubi. Paper presented at the 9th Annual International Conference of the Japan Society for Language Sciences. Assessing the Quality of Persian Translation of Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-four Based on House's Model: Overt-Covert Translation Distinction Hossein Heidari TABRIZI Islamic Azad University heidaritabrizi@gmail.com Azizeh CHALAK Islamic Azad University azizeh_chalak@yahoo.com Amir Hossein TAHERIOUN Islamic Azad University ataherioun@gmail .com Abstract This study aimed to assess the quality of Persian translation of Orwell's (1949) Nineteen Eighty-Four by Balooch (2004) based on House's (1997) model of translation quality assessment. To do so, about 10 percent of the source text was randomly selected. The profile of the source text register was produced and the genre was realized. The source text profile was compared to the translation text profile. The result of this comparison was dimensional mismatches and overt errors. The dimensional mismatches were categorized based on different dimensions of register. The overt errors which were based on denotative mismatches and target system errors were categorized into omissions, additions, substitutions, and breaches of the target language system. Then, the frequencies of occurrences of subcategories of overt errors along with their percentages were calculated. The dimensional mismatches and a large number of major overt errors including omissions and substitutions indicated that the translation was not in accordance with the House's view stating that literary works needed to be translated overtly. Mismatches on different levels of register showed that the cultural filter was applied in translation and the second-level functional equivalence required for overt translation was not reached. Therefore, the Persian translation of Nineteen Eighty-Four did not fulfill the criteria to be an overt translation. Keywords: translation; quality; assessment; House; Nineteen Eighty-Four; Orwell Acta Linguistica Asiatica, 4(3), 2014. ISSN: 2232-3317, http://revije.ff.uni-ij.si/ala/ DOI: 10.4312/ala.4.3.29-42 Povzetek Cilj študije je po House-ovem modelu oceniti kvaliteto prevoda Orwellovega Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949), ki ga je v perzijščino leta 2004 prevedel Balooch. Iz omenjenega dela je bilo naključno izbranega približno deset odstotkov teksta, iz katerega smo naredili profil izvornega besedila, ki je bil kasneje primerjan s profilom prevedenega besedila. Razultati so nakazali na dimenzijska neskladja in vidne napake. Dimenzijske neskladja so bila kategorizirana na osnovi različnih dimenzij registra. Vidne napake, ki so predvsem posledica denotativnega neskladja ali napak v ciljnem sistemu, so bile najpogosteje definirane kot opustitve, dopolnitve, zamenjave ali kršitve sistema ciljnega jezika. Podkategorije vidnih napak so bile analizirane statistično in za vsako podkategorijo podan je odstotek pojavitve. Tako dimenzijska neskladja kot tudi veliko številko osnovnih vidnih napak nakazujejo, da prevod ni v skladu s House-ovo idejo o odkritem prevajanju literarnih del. Neskladja na različnih nivojih registra kažejo na to, da je bil prevod kulturno prilagojen, zato ni izpolnil pogojev funkcijske primerljivosti in s tem t.i. odkritega prevoda. Ključne besede: prevod; kvaliteta; ocena; House; Nineteen Eighty-Four; Orwell 1. Introduction According to Williams (2004), concern for excellence in translation, especially translation of literary and religious works, has existed for long time. There have been discussions, debates, and approaches about quality of translation and how good a translation of a text should be. Translators, translation companies and translation services of governments and international organizations must all be accountable for the quality of their product. Yet the question of how to judge that quality can be very difficult. This judgment is different from a person to another and it depends on type of the text. The serious issue is concerning the quality of translation of literary works. Every community has its own specific culture, traditions, and language with different structures. Consequently, every source text has its own linguistic, semantic, and pragmatic structures that can be different from those of target text. Thus, bearing this in mind, the translator should take a specific strategy to transfer intended meaning and structure of the original text into target text. Failing to recognize the structure of source text and the way of rendering the structure into target language affects the quality of translation. In Iran, there are translations especially in the field of literature that have low quality. It can be due to the fact Iranian translators are less familiar with or less interested in the translation quality and the criteria and standards by which translation should be evaluated. There should be reliable criteria and standards by which translation can be assessed and evaluated. These criteria and standards can work properly on the basis of a framework or a model. They differentiate a good translation from a bad one. They provide valuable information in which the translator's failure and mistakes in translation process are identified. This can help translators improve their performance by knowing their weaknesses and mistakes and as a result, the quality of the translation is enhanced. There are different models and approaches for assessing the quality of translation. One of them is House's (1997) model of translation quality assessment (TQA) which covers almost all aspects in process of translation and has some advantages over other models due to its coverage issue and the easiness of use. Several researchers used House's (1997) model to analyze the quality of translation of literary works. Mohebbipour (2010) in his article assessed the quality of Persian translation of Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury. He focused on distinction between overt and covert translation and stated that according to House, to translate literary works such as The Sound and the Fury the overt kind of translation needed to be applied. Then, for analysis of the text, he defined overt errors and covert errors and provided some Persian translation examples with their transcriptions for overt errors. Mohebbipour also provided word for word translation for errors that he found in translation. He calculated the frequency of the occurrences of errors and finally he used Chi-square to analyze the results of the study. By comparing ST profile with the TT one, only one mismatch in the tenor was found. There were also instances of overt errors such as wrong translation, omissions, additions, and wrong combination of elements in the translation. The researcher claimed that the translator had a good knowledge of TL syntax because there was no evidence of breach of TL system. Computing the frequency of errors through Chi-square, the result showed the statistically significant difference between two overtly and covert errors as well as the statistically significant difference among subcategories of overt errors. Gehrmann (2011) used the TQA model proposed by House (1997) to assess Swedish translation of Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings. The main work of the research was to provide the textual profiles of both ST and TT. By analyzing the profiles of the two texts, a number of mismatches on the dimensions of tenor and field were found. There were also overt errors caused by the semantic additions. The additions on the dimension of field caused a greater explicitness in the translation and increased aesthetic pleasure for the audience. However, this manipulated the readers' interpretation and imagination and as a result, the interpersonal function. The social attitude was changed on the dimension of tenor because the level of style becomes more literary by addition of qualifying adverbials. No errors were found on the dimensions of genre and tenor. Based on the translator's view about the translation in which translation was to be like an original of TT, Gehrmann concluded that the translation of The Lord of the Rings was a covert kind of translation. The purpose of this research was to assess the quality of Persian translation of Orwell's (1949) Nineteen Eighty-Four by Balooch (2004) based on House's (1997) model of translation quality assessment (TQA). By using House's model, the translation strategies used by the translator became known. House mentions two types of strategies known as overt translation strategy and covert translation strategy that translators can use based on different types of texts. Distinction between overt translation and covert translation revealed the errors and mistakes made during the translation process as well as mismatches between ST and TT. Based on House's model of TQA, there are two main sources of errors in translation: (a) overt errors and (b) covert errors. Significance of overt errors in this study leaded the evaluation process into computing the frequency of occurrences of these errors in order to see whether a significant difference existed between ST and TT based on House's distinction between overt and covert translation. Based on analysis of findings of the study, the following questions could be answered: 1. Which strategies has the translator most frequently used for translating Orwell's (1949) Nineteen Eighty-Four based on House's (1997) model of translation quality assessment? 2. To what extent has the quality of Persian translation of Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four been preserved based on House's model? 2. Methodology 2.1 Participants The researcher of this study was taken as the participant, since he selected materials and analyzed the data. However, for the matter of inter-rater reliability, another participant who was an MA student of English Translation was selected to study and to analyze the same extracted materials with the same theoretical framework. The purpose was replication of the research in the identical situations in order to see whether the same results were achieved or not. 2.2 Materials For the purposes of this study, Orwell's (1949) Nineteen Eighty-Four was chosen as the case study. It is a classic novel which has influenced contemporary literature and some other artistic works such as popular music and movies. This book is considered as a dystopian science fiction containing several neologisms such as Big Brother, doublethink, and Thought Police. Some of these neologisms have been brought into language and become contemporary vernacular. The popularity and the fame of Nineteen Eighty-Four were the other reasons to choose this book as the case study. Since this study was a descriptive-comparative analysis of a translation by means of House's (1997) model of TQA, the materials consisted of Nineteen Eighty-Four and its Persian translation by Balooch (2004). Without considering the front matter and the appendix, Nineteen Eighty-Four has totally 234 pages (from page 5 to page 239) divided into three parts. In fact, the analysis of the whole book and comparing it with its Persian translation would have taken too much time. Moreover, specific features of the novel such as its language, characters, and style did not belong to certain parts of the text but they were distributed all over the text. Considering the above mentioned reasons, a systematic random sampling method was used to collect the data. Based on this method 10 percent of the book (about 23 pages) was selected as the sample. To find the frequency interval, 234 was divided by 23; the result was 10. Every 10th page of the book (source text) included the pages of 15, 25, 35, 45, 55, 65, 75, 85, 95, 105, 115, 125, 135, 145, 155, 165, 175, 185, 195, 205, 215, 225, and 235 based on which the text analysis was performed and compared with the TT. 2.3 Theoretical Framework House's (1997) model of translation quality assessment was used as a theoretical framework for this research. Unlike some other models which consider the text consisting of separate elements, House's model takes the text as a whole phenomenon. The model is functional and encompasses different dimensions of text such as linguistic, pragmatic and discourse. House's (1997) model involves textual and register analysis of profiles of both the source and target text. Register analysis of ST and TT profile can be realized via lexical, syntactic, and textual means. Textual means comprises theme-dynamics, clausal linkage, and iconic linkage. The model operates at different levels of analysis. It begins from the level of 'individual textual function'; then, goes to the levels of register and genre; and finally ends at the level of 'language/text'. The level of register analysis covers three dimensions of field, tenor, and mode. Field refers to analysis of subject matter and social action. Tenor covers participant relationship including author's provenance and stance, social role relationship and social attitude. Mode refers to channel or medium of communication and participation in the text. Comparing ST profile with TT profile bring about mismatches between the two profiles. Dimensional errors and mismatches are referred to as covert errors, whereas, mismatches of the denotative meanings or breaches of target language system are overt errors. House also presumes two kinds of translation, namely as covert and overt translation. A covert translation is a translation that appears as if it produces in the target culture. On the other hand, an overt translation is a translation that the cultural features of the source text are purposefully retained. After analysis of ST, TT, mismatches and errors, the translation can be recognized as either covert or overt one. While overt translation and its original text need to be matched at the levels of genre, register, and language/text, in covert translation only genre and the primary level function have to be matched with the original text. It is worth mentioning that according to House, overt translation is suitable for the texts such as literary works, fictions, moral anecdotes, comedy dialogues, and historic speeches, while covert translation covers text types including scientific texts, tourist information booklets, economic texts, journalistic texts, and advertisements. 2.4 Procedures At first, based on House's (1997) model, the ST was analyzed and its profile including the register was obtained. Based on register analysis of ST, ST genre was realized. Then, a statement of function was made for the source text. Then, the same steps were taken for the TT, that is, TT profile was obtained. The TT profile was analyzed and compared with the ST profile. The results were mismatches and errors including lexical, syntactic, textual mismatches. They categorized into two groups of covert errors and overt errors. The frequency of occurrences of the overt errors was calculated. It should be mentioned that the unit of errors recognized in the study was phrase. Each phrase contained one or more errors. Every single error was taken into account in the process of calculation of the frequency of occurrences. Each error and mismatch was provided with a description and an example from ST and TT. A statement of quality was made based on the results of analysis ST and TT. Finally, the type of translation was recognized based House's distinction between overt and covert translation. Since this study was based on House's (1997) model and this model was a nonquantitative and descriptive-explanatory one, a non-statistical and descriptive method was used in order to analyze the data. By comparing the randomly selected parts of the source text with their Persian counterparts in the translated text, some mismatches and errors were revealed. The dimensional errors were referred to as covert errors; while, those errors related to denotative mismatches or target system errors were referred to as overt errors. Because of significance role of overt errors in translation quality assessment of literary translations, the frequency of occurrences of overt errors and their percentages were computed. House suggests overt kind of translation for literary works. Therefore, the translation was assessed against the criteria and characteristics that an overt translation needed to have. In other words, the ST and TT profiles were analyzed to see whether the second level functional equivalence was achieved and consequently, whether at this level the target text matched genre, register, text and linguistic strategies of the source text. If these criteria were fulfilled, the translation would be assumed as an overt kind of translation. On the contrary, if the translation did not match with the source text on dimensions of register and language/text and instead, applied a cultural filter, then, the translation could be assumed as a covert kind of translation. 3. Findings 3.5 Source Text (ST) Profile To describe the dimension of FIELD, it should be said that Nineteen Eighty-Four is a dystopian novel. It is a classic novel which is very famous and popular among other literary works. The story is designed to be read by adults. Lexical means applied on field were use of neologisms such as Big Brother, doublethink, and Thought Police, use of no technical academic terms, presence of several collocations and idioms such as p. 15 act a part; p. 105 the coast is clear; and instances of informal words like damn and negroid. The story mostly contained short simple clauses and sentences. However, there were several instances of long sentences consisted of short subordinate clauses and phrases. Orwell (1949) often used the punctuations such as semicolon, colon, and comma within the text. The author often began the sentences with adverbs, conjunctions, and relative pronouns: p. 25 what he had written...; and p. 85 Then he went.... Strong cohesion was achieved through repetitions and iconic linkage: p. 65 and then, for., and then a voice...; p. 135 if I confess., if I refuse.... There were also theme dynamics especially sequences of theme-rheme, anaphoric referencing by means of pro-forms for noun phrases, adverbials, clauses or sentences, and instances of clausal linkage: when, as, but, and, that is, therefore. On TENOR, author's temporal, geographical and social provenance was unmarked, contemporary middle class standard British English. The author's personal (emotional and intellectual) stance provoked a sense of fear for readers. The author was against totalitarianism and dictatorship. He used special lexical items to provide a sense of fear for readers: p. 85 torture chamber. Several intensifiers, adjectives and adverbs were identified including violently, horrible, and deadly. There were frequent uses of narrative and descriptive structures to describe a dictatorial society: p. 25 and in front of him there lay not death but annihilation. For social role relationship, the author put himself on a par with his addressees. The author acted as a narrator who told the story to the audience. He got readers involve in the story by using second single personal pronoun in an ordinary way without any authority. Although some informal words and idioms were used, the text did not contain technical and complicated word. The syntactic means applied were uses of personal pronouns and possessive adjectives in monologue, and dialogic parts: p. 15 always the eyes watching you., and p. 235 we must meet again. The author most often talked about the Winston. That could suggest that the entire passage was described from Winston's point of view. Social attitude was consultative and informal. It was consultative and conversational because the text contained conversations and there was also participation between addressees. Therefore, no great social distance between author and audience could be seen. It was informal because there were contractions and informal lexical items such as slangs especially in the dialogues of characters of the novel. The lexical means applied here were use of colloquial, informal lexical items, use of idioms, use of gambits such as p. 75 the point is, p. 185 to tell you the truth, and use of lexical items indicating vagueness, for example kind of, sort of. The syntactic means were frequent use of single quotation marks ('...') for direct speeches, frequent use of contractions like p. 95 you'll have to., and presence of elliptical structures: p. 145 any question? p. 135 why not? On MODE, the medium was complex because the text was written to be read as if spoken. The lexical means were use of colloquial lexical items and presence of interjections including p. 115 but look! and p. 185 Ah, Smith! he said you too! The syntactic means were presence of elliptical structures, use of single quotation marks ('...') for marking direct speeches between characters, use of personal pronouns especially first and second personal pronouns, frequencies of contractions, frequencies of short coordinated clauses especially in dialogic parts linked with comma and and. There was also use of dash (-) rarely in narrator's speech and more frequently in conversations between characters to show a short pause in the speaker's ongoing speech: p. 215 but always - do not forget this, Winston - always there will be the intoxication. The text was etic because there were references to readers, links to the particular participants through the frequent uses of deictic personal pronouns, and involvement of addresser and addresses together. There were also redundancy through repetition and iconic linkage in the text. Participation was complex because there was a monologue with several instances of readers being directly addressed and with built-in dialogic parts. Predominance third person personal and possessive pronouns indicated narrative format of story. There were also other types of pronouns in dialogic and conversational parts especially first and second personal and possessive pronouns to indicate a direct conversational interaction inside the story. Frequent switches in the text between monologue format of the text and dialogic utterances between characters were seen as well. The text was predominantly etic drawing its readers into the text through ample uses of deictic pronouns: p. 205 we bring him to our side. GENRE was dystopian novel and science fiction. 3.6 Statement of Function The function of Nineteen Eighty-Four mostly consisted of an interpersonal functional component. The ideational functional component was also implicitly present in the text, in that the text informed its readers about certain events involving the protagonist and the other characters depicted in the text. The author's intention was to warn people about totalitarian societies such as communist countries by providing a similar society which would exist in future. The interpersonal function was marked through the GENRE, since the author focused on the character of Winston who lived in a totalitarian society and described his thoughts, beliefs, and challenges. On the dimension of FIELD, the interpersonal function was present due to using colloquial lexical items, absence of technical academic terms, almost simple syntactic structures, and redundancy through repetition and iconic linkage. On TENOR, the consultative style level marked through informal lexical items, contractions, gambits, ellipses and repetitions supported interpersonal function. The MODE had also the interpersonal functional component because the medium of the text is 'written to be read as if spoken' and the participation was marked by frequent dialogic parts interspersed in the monologic framework. 3.7 Comparison of Original and Translation On FIELD, there were lexical mismatches because the informality of words was reduced: thick negroid lips vs labhayi mutuvarim va bar amadah. There were also syntactic mismatches because some of long sentences consisting of several subordinated clauses in the original text were translated into separate short sentences: p. 235 He made a halfhearted attempt to catch up, then slowed down, turned, and made off in the opposite direction. vs ibtida ba bi mayli sa'y kard bi u birisad. bad qadam ha ra ahistah kard, charkhid va dar jahati mukhalif bi rah uftad. On TENOR, there were syntactic mismatches in social role relationship, since the second personal pronoun of you in monologue parts was translated differently in Persian, and instead impersonal pronouns such as insan, fard were used. As a result, interpersonal effectiveness and the involvement of readers in the story were reduced. Lexical mismatches were seen in social attitude since some of informal lexical items and idioms are markedly more formal in Persian translation. That widened the distance between the author and readers: p. 125 a lot of rubbish vs muhmal bafiha. On MODE, there were lexical mismatches in medium because some of colloquial and informal lexical items were translated to more formal lexical items in Persian (see lexical mismatches in TENOR). 3.8 Overt Errors This section presents overt errors and their four subcategories of omissions, additions, substitutions, and breaches of the target language system. For each group one example is provided. 3.8.1 Omissions Omissions refer to those missed parts in the translation text which have not been translated by the translator. Table 1: Omissions. ST TT Explanation p. 65 The translator missed the whole sentence. The overt And the tone of the translation for this sentence is: Va tuni ahang avaz music changed too. shud. 3.8.2 Additions Additions occur when the translator adds extra elements in translation that do not match with the original text. Table 2: Additions. _ST_ p. 205 We bring him over to our side, _TT_ Mä ü rä jisman va ruhan bi jibhayi khudimän mulhaq mïkunïm. _Explanation_ jisman va ruhan means physically and mentally in English. However, such words did not exist in the original text. 3.8.3 Substitutions This section contains errors which are due to either wrong selections or wrong combinations. Table 3: Substitutions. ST TT Explanation p. 225 Also he knew that somewhere or other she was still alive and needed his help. Dar zimn mïdânist ü zindah ast va bi kumaki vînstun nïyâz därad. The subject of the sentence (he) refers to Winston. Instead of using the name vînstun for adjective pronoun of his which distorts the meaning of sentence, it is better to translate the sentence like this: Dar zimn mîdanist U zindah ast va bi kumakash nîyaz darad. 3.8.4 Breaches of the Target Language System Breaches of the target language system are due to either ungrammaticality, that is, clear breaches of the target language system, or dubious acceptability, that is, breaches of the norm of usage. No instance of breaches of the TL system was found for ungrammaticality. Table 4: Dubious acceptability. ST TT Explanation p. 65 He noticed that both Aaronson and Rutherford had broken noses. Vnstün daryäft ki bînîyi arunsun va radirfurd har du shikastigî darad. The clause had broken noses was literally translated by the translator. However, it is not common in Persian to use the verb dashtan for shikastigi. Instead, this should have been translated like this: Vinstun daryaft ki biniyi arunsun va radirfurd shikastah ast. The frequency of occurrences of each type of overt errors was calculated as follows: Table 5: Frequency of occurrences of overt errors. Types of Errors Frequency Percentage Omissions 76 25 % Additions 34 11 % Substitutions 196 63 % Breaches of the TL System 2 1 % Total 308 100 % As it is shown in the Table 5, the largest group belongs to the category of substitutions with 63% and the smallest one is the breaches of TL system with only 1% of total errors. Between the two extremes, there are the category of omissions with 25%, which is the largest category after the substitutions, and the category of additions with 11% of the total errors. 4. Discussion and Conclusion According to House (1997), the overt kind of translation is needed for translation of literary works. Since Nineteen Eighty-Four is a literary work, therefore, in this study, the judgment for assessing the quality of translation was based on the criteria and standards defined for overt translation. That was why a considerable attention was paid for overt errors in the process of translation quality assessment. The analysis of original and translation revealed a number of mismatches along the dimensions of FIELD, TENOR, and MODE. These mismatches caused a change of the interpersonal functional component. There were also a large number of overt errors that affected the ideational component and the transmission of information. On FIELD, the long sentences in the ST were translated into several short sentences. As a result, a greater explicitness was made in translation. The interpersonal functional component was changed because the explicitness in translation directed readers' imagination and interpretation much more closely. On TENOR, the interpersonal functional component was changed because the second personal pronoun in the monologue parts of the original was substituted with the impersonal pronoun in the translation. Some of informal lexical items were translated more formal. Accordingly, the style level was changed in several instances and it became less informal as well. On MODE, there was a change in informality of the text which was similar to TENOR. Although, there were a number of dimensional mismatches in the translation, but GENRE remained unchanged. The greater amount of loss was due to overt errors where a total number of 308 overt errors were identified. Out of this number, 196 errors (about 63% of total number of errors) belonged to substitutions which constituted the largest group of overt errors. Omissions, additions, and the breaches of the TL system allocated 76, 34, and 2 errors (about 25%, 11%, 1% of total errors) respectively. The omissions and substitutions were assumed as major errors; while, additions and breaches of TL system were minor ones. Omissions were major errors because the translator intentionally or unintentionally missed and omitted several parts of the text that in most of the cases were not justifiable. Overt errors of substitutions were caused by wrong selections and wrong combinations in translation. This type of errors was due to the fact wrong equivalents were selected in translation. Additions used by the translator caused more clarification, explicitness, and redundancy in the text. In most of the cases, additions were neither necessary nor justifiable. Breaches of the TL system that had the lowest frequency of occurrences among the others did not have so much effect on the quality of translation. To answer question one, the findings of the study including dimensional mismatches and overt errors should be taken into account. In other words, the translator's translation strategies could be revealed through the analysis of dimensional mismatches in general and analysis of overt errors in particular. According to the analysis, the strategies used by the translator were omissions, additions, substitutions, and use of cultural filter. However, the most frequent strategy used in translation was substitutions with 196 items. After substitution, omissions and additions were respectively the most frequent strategies used by the translator. To answer question two of research and finally make the statement of quality, the criteria and features needed for overt translation should be borne in mind. It is obvious that in some parts of the text, the translator did not take account of denotative meanings of the words of the original. The author's style was not paid so much attention. In several cases, the translator manipulated the text which did not sound to be reasonable. In other words, it can be said that most of the text under the study was not translated overtly. Therefore, it can be concluded that based on the large number of overt errors including major errors such as omissions and substitutions, the criteria of overt translation were not fulfilled by the translator. Further, the application of the cultural filter to some parts of translation indicated changes at the levels of register (including dimensions of FIELD, TENOR, and MODE). There was more explicitness in the translation that affected the interpersonal functional component. Thus, the second-level functional equivalence required for overt translation was not reached. In addition, the visibility of the translator needed for overt translation was not seen in some parts of the translation. As a result, the Persian translation of Nineteen Eighty-Four by Balooch (2004) could not be assumed as an overt translation but reversely a covert translation. The findings of this study can be compared to Gehrmann's (2011) research on quality assessment of Swedish translation of Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings. Like this study, Gehrmann analyzed textual profiles of both ST and TT and provided examples for them. He found a number of mismatches along the dimensions of tenor and field. He also detected the overt errors which were only caused by semantic additions and other types of overt errors were ignored. Unlike the current study, he did not calculate the frequencies of occurrences of each error. Finally, he concluded that the translation was a covert kind of translation. His conclusion mostly relied on analysis of dimensional errors. The translation quality assessment of Nineteen Eighty-Four not only recognized the problematic areas including mismatches and errors in this particular translation but also revealed some facts about translation of literary works. This study showed what problems and difficulties a literary translator had to face with and what strategies he applied in the process of translation. The frequent strategies used by the translator in translation of such a literary work were omissions and substitutions which in most of the cases were not justifiable. A large number of errors found in this Persian translation of the popular literary work underline the significance of translation quality assessment for literary works in Iran. There can be Persian translations of many literary works that need to be reviewed and revised. Taking into account a theoretical framework as House's (1997) model in translation such can help translators detect and avoid mistakes and errors in translation process. The findings of this study can be helpful for literary translators to get familiar with problems in translation of literary as well as strategies used to cope with such problems. Omissions and substitutions are the most frequent errors in Persian translation of Nineteen Eighty-Four. The editors of translation can also recognize the above-mentioned errors in literary translation and remove them in the process of reviewing and editing translation. The instructors and would-be translators can use the findings of the study in the process of learning and teaching translation. The major limitation of the study was this fact that House's (1997) model of TQA consisted of several different parts and it took into account almost all aspects of translation. Therefore, in this study, analyzing a number of pages took so much time and it became s a monotonous task. In this study, only the frequencies of occurrences of overt errors were computed. For further research, the frequencies of occurrences of dimensional mismatches can be calculated as well. Overt errors can be subdivided into more categories. The quality of translation of Nineteen Eighty-Four can be assessed by means of the other models of TQA and the results can be compared with those ones of this study. A similar study (translation quality assessment) can be done with literary texts in other languages. Additionally, other types of text with different genres can be assessed with House's model. References Baker, M. & Saldanha, G. (2009). Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge. Gehrmann, C. (2011). Translation quality assessment: A model in practice. Retrieved May 23, 2012, from http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hh:diva-16041 Hassan, B. A. (2011). Literary translation: Aspects of pragmatic meaning. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Hatim, B., & Munday, J. (2004). Translation: An advanced resource book. New York: Routledge. Heidary, J., & Haghani, A. (2009). Translation quality assessment: The examination of a literary text by baker's taxonomy. Retrieved August 02, 2012, from http://www.translationdirectory.com/articles/article2036.php Hewson, L. (2011). An approach to translation criticism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co. Honig, H. (1998). Complexity, contrastive linguistics and translator training: Comments and responses. In C. Schaffner (Ed.), Translation and quality (pp. 83-89). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Limited. House, J. (1997). Translation quality assessment: A model revisited. Tubingen: Gunter Narr Verlag. House, J. (2001). Translation quality assessment: Linguistic description versus social evaluation. Meta: Translators' Journal, 46, 243-257. House, J. (2009). Translation. London: Oxford University Press. Mohebbipour, M. (2010). The application of House's model to William Faulkner's 'The Sound and the Fury' and Its Persian translation by Saleh Hosseini. Retrieved May 16, 2012, from http://www.articlesbase.com/publishing-articles/the-application-of-houses-model-to-william-faulkners-the-sound-and-the-fury-and-its-persian-translation-by-saleh-hosseini-2937453.html Munday, J. (2008). Introducing translation studies: Theories and application (2nd ed.). London: Routledge Publication. Newmark, P. (1982). Approaches to translation. Oxford: Pergamon Institute of English. Newmark, P. (1988). A textbook of translation. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd. Nineteen eighty-four. (2012). Retrieved March 04, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four Orwell, G. (1949). Nineteen eighty-four. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books Ltd. Sadeghi, A. (2009). Translation quality assessment. Retrieved May 25, 2012, from http://www.articlesbase.com/languages-articles/translation-quality-assessment-tqa-1120764.html Thaicharoen, K. (2007). Translation quality: A study of Harry Potter: The philosopher's stone. Unpublished master's thesis, Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok, Thailand. Uraz, N. (2007). The criticism of the translations of Paul Auster's 'City of Glass'. Unpublished master's thesis, Hacettepe University Graduate School of Social Sciences, Ankara, Turkey. Williams, M. (2001). The application of argumentation theory to translation quality assessment. Meta: Translators' Journal, 46, 326-344. 288 .gjlj .j . 1984 .(1383)