Contrastive Scientific and Technical Registeras a Translation Problem.HEIDRUN GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST Introduction Scientific and technical (ST) register hasbeen extensively treated as one of thespecific features of LSP1 communication(Sager, Dungworth 1980). However, descriptionsof ST register, being traditionally limitedto lexical-terminological and syntactic levelshave usually not extended beyond the sentencelevel.

Although the topic of ST discourse phenomenahas become more prominent in recent LSPdiscussions (e.g., Hoffmann 1985), cross-cultural variance has only been marginallyfeatured in contrastive register analyses(Ulijn 1989). Contrastive descriptions ofvarying discourse phenomena in ST register,however, are a prerequisite for makingtechnical and scientific register transparentand accessible as a problem of translation.Preceding from the idea that ST register isrelated to the function of ST texts,2 thefollowing article attempts to show that

variant ways of presenting and sequencinginformation are register phenomena thatreflect cross-culturally different author-reader relationships.3

After discussing the general notion ofregister, this paper describes differingarrangements of "given" information to "new"information with respect to differing author-reader relationships and conventions. Then anattempt is made to establish and classifycriteria for describing discourse phenomena inST register by examining cross-culturalvariation in "given"-"new" contracts betweenauthor and reader. The relevance of thesedifferences as potential translationproblems is shown on the basis of English

22 □ Contrastive Scientific and TechnicalRegister

German examples, taken largely from theexperience of co-translating Samuelson &Nordhaus, Economics into German. This articlewill thus be limited to English written STregister in the field of economics and thediscussion of possible German equivalents.4

Scientific and Technical (ST) Register Thereis considerable confusion when it comes todefining register in general.5

For our purposes, we will follow Ulijn'sillustrative explication (1989:185ff) since itspecifically accommodates ST register: "[register is the] verbal repertory of thespeaker . . . a term originally drawn frommusic, suggesting the various drawers of a chest (the verbal repertory of the speaker)which are pulled out in any particular communication situation. Oneof such situations is inherent in technicaland scientific register." Descriptions of scientific and technical (ST)register in LSP research have been largelysystems- or langue-oriented,6 concentrating onsuch important lexical phenomena as frequencyand distribution of terms and term-formationpatterns resulting in neologisms and faux amis(misleading cognates; literally, "falsefriends"). On the syntactic level it waspossible to isolate the more frequent use (incomparison with common language) of syntacticfunction words, participles, infinitives andthe present tense. It was also establishedthat sentences are likely to be lengthier,

nominalizations more frequent, and the passivevoice more popular in ST texts.7 On a sentence-transcending, i.e., textual ordiscourse level, however, systematiccomparative studies are almost nonexistent—afact that may be largely due to the lack oflinguistic criteria for description, which inturn results from the controversialtheoretical status of discourse phenomena ingeneral.8

HEIDRUN GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST □ 23 Most of the lexical and syntactic analyseshave focussed on the dichotomy 'languages forspecial purposes (LSP)—common language' in theinterest of teaching foreign ST languages (nottranslation), and have led to the generalconclusion that "languages are apparentlysimilar from the textual point of view aswell" (Ulijn 1989: 212). The assumption orlikelihood of comparative differences on thetextual or discourse level, on the other hand,is a prerequisite for making the topic of STregister that exceeds the sentence levelrelevant to translation. For translation, asystems approach is a necessary but not asufficient dimension since translation setsout from the parole level of language and

consequently needs to encompass parolephenomena. It is, therefore, a necessaryprecondition for translation purposes toidentify and describe discourse phenomena on aparole level before cross-cultural differencescan be discussed. The following section willattempt to identify translation-specificdiscourse phenomena in ST register in terms ofInformation Dynamics and Information Packagingas they reflect differing authorreaderconventions. Discourse Phenomena asExpressions of Culture-Specific Author-ReaderConventions In describing ST discourse asInformation Dynamics and Information Packagingphenomena we will proceed from the idea thattexts reflect language functions (Bühler 1934)and that the text function is manifested inthe structure of the text,9 which in turn canbe described as alternating sequences of"given" and "new" information, "given" or"new" in the sense that the author perceivesthe reader to consider the informationimparted as either "given" or "new" andorganizes the information in a way that makesthese chunks of information (more or lesseasily) identifiable to the reader.

24 □ Contrastive Scientific and TechnicalRegister It is important to emphasize that a textcontains both, "given" and "new" informationfor the reader, "given" or "new" not inabsolute but relative terms: "given" or "new"relative to what the author perceives thereader to know ( = "given") or not to know (="new"). Information in the text is thus notper se "given" or "new," but is "given" in thesense that the author thinks it is "given" (=known) or "new" (= unknown) to the reader(i.e., classified according to the author'sperspective). Whether the information isindeed "given" to the reader, i.e., whetherthe reader can identify the author's intended"given" information as "given," depends on thereader's knowledge of the (text) world(reader's perspective). More specifically, itdepends on whether the reader's knowledge ofthe (text) world is similar to what the authorperceives the reader's (text) world knowledgeto be or, in linguistic terms, to what extentthe two perspectives of author and readeroverlap with respect to shared assumptions ina specific communicative situation (cf.Mudersbach 1981, as applied in Gerzymisch-

Arbogast 1987).10 Following Grice's cooperativeprinciple of manner (Grice 1975:46),11 we canassume that ST register reflects an implicitagreement between author and reader about how(1) information that the author thinks is"given" or known to the reader and (2)information that the author thinks is "new" tothe reader is proportioned and alternatelyarranged in a discourse. We can further assumethat the proportions of "given" and "new"information in texts and their alternatearrangement is determined by convention as an"author-reader contract" which varies cross-culturally. For the purposes of this articlewe will proceed from the hypothesis thatcontrastive ST registers vary cross-culturallyaccording to different types of implicitauthor-reader contracts which are determinedby different cultural HEIDRUN GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST □ 25norms and that depending on the type of"author-reader contract," "given" and "new"information in texts may be provided indifferent quantities and/or proportions andmay be differently presented and sequenced.Author-reader contracts and theirproportionate arrangement of "given"-"new"

information in texts can be categorized intoan author-oriented contract form, stressingthe expressive language function (Bühler'sKundgabefunktion) and a reader-orientedcontract form, stressing the vocative functionof language (Bühler's Appellfunktion). Thesetwo forms constitute the extremes on a scaleof author-reader contracts, i.e., on a scaleof cross-culturally varying ST register types,a phenomenon that manifests itself in the waythe author presents his information to theanticipated reader in a closer (reader-oriented contract) or more distant way(author-oriented contract). Reader-orientedcontracts or register types can becharacterized by the author's intention toobtain the reader's "empathy" towards theinformation presented by trying to establish a"closeness" with the reader. This is generallyachieved by providing a great deal of "given"information to enable the reader to relate the"new" information to a familiar situation orexperience. The reader-oriented strategyproceeds from the assumption that if a readercan identify more readily with the message theauthor wants to impart, the text appears moreunderstandable and thus more "interesting" to

him (cf. "Information Packaging" below).Author-oriented register types, on the otherhand, are less considerate of the reader,focussing on the author's knowledge andqualifications, which are presented with theprimary intention to convince the reader ofthe importance of the "new" message the authorhas to convey. Being less concerned with thereader's interest or ability to identify withor 26 □ Contrastive Scientific and TechnicalRegister understand the message, the author can affordgranting less "given" information, focussinginstead on the presentation and development of"new information." Whether a more reader-oriented or a moreauthor-oriented contract is the accepted normin a particular culture depends on (1) The value system prevalent in a societywith regard to the status of knowledge andscience and technology (ST register) and (2) The relevant values of an individual vis-à-vis other individuals or the society as awhole. This may not be an "either/or"situation but rather measurable as values on ascale.

Describing Contrastive ST Register: Information Dynamics and Information PackagingAccepting the postulate that ST register canbe classified according to differing author-reader contracts in terms of (more or less)"given" vs. "new" information, we candistinguish two dimensions for describing thediffering arrangements of "given"-"new" units,(1) a macro-level dynamic perspective(Information Dynamics) and (2) a micro-level staticperspective (Information Packaging): INFORMATION DYNAMICS On the macro-level of texts, InformationDynamics describes the way in which authorsproportion and sequence the "given"-"new"information they want to convey to theirreaders. It is a dynamic measure in that itdescribes the arrangement and development ofinformation throughout the text and isreflected in parameters such as: Titling, Initiating, Sequencing Title Conventions Title conventions refer to what type ofinformation is conveyed

HEIDRUN GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST □ 27 in what manner and how the title relates tothe remaining text (Hellwig 1984). Based on "given"-"new"information, a title can serve the followingbasic functions:12 to indicate what the textfollowing is about (reflecting Bühler'sDarstellungsfunktion of language and the"informative" text function (Reiss 1976) basedon Bühler's Darstellungsfunktion): Example: G. Brown & G. Yule, DiscourseAnalysis. Cambridge, 198In these cases the title is a factual "reducedparaphrase of the text" (Dressier 1973), serving only to informthe reader about the contents of the text following. The titlehere is "new information," signalizing the "new" informationfollowing in the text, i.e., is a "new-type"title. - to describe the author's attitude tothe text following (reflecting Bühler'sKundgabefunktion of language and the"expressive" text function (Reiss 1976) basedon Bühler's Kundgabefunktion): Example: L.Rosten, The Joys of Yiddish. New York, 1968.In this case the text following is

characterized by the author from the author'sperspective. The title here contains some"new" information, signalizing the text topic,but also "given" information—the author'sattitude to the text—the attitude being"given" in the sense that the reader canidentify with a (shared) feeling, valuejudgement or irony ( = given). These are"given/new-type" titles. - to attract or"lure" the reader into reading the textfollowing (reflecting Bühler's Appelfunktionof language and the "vocative" text function(Reiss 1976)): Example: G. Lakoff, Women,Fire, and Dangerous Things. Chicago, 1986. Inthis case the author intends to make the textinteresting to the reader; the title containsprimarily "given" information in the sensethat the reader "knows" the objects and/orevents referred to in the text following,i.e., it is a "given-type" title. 28 □ Contrastive Scientific and TechnicalRegister The way in which a title relates to a text asa "new-," "given/new" or "given-type" title variescross-culturally. ST text titles commonly havethe primary function of being "informative"

about the following text, i.e., are "new-type"titles. However, different ST registers mayallow varying ranges of secondary,superimposed functions, i.e., "given/new-" and"given-type" titles. Initiating Information Initiating refers to the type of informationpresented first at the beginning of a wholetext or chapter and how it is presented andties in with the remaining text segments.Here, again, we can distinguish threedifferent types of "given"-"new" arrangementsaccording to Bühler's language and Reiss' textfunctions: - to indicate what the text following isabout, (Bühler's Darstellungsfunktion andReiss' "informative" text function): Example: This study will touch on a variety oftopics in syntactic theory and English syntax,a few in some detail, several quitesuperficially, and none exhaustively. It willbe concerned with the syntactic component of agenerative grammar . . . Noam Chomsky, Aspects of a Theory of Syntax.Cambridge, 1965, p.3 (beginning of book). Inthis case the initiating statements arefactual, indicating what the text following is

about and how it is set up, informing thereader about the text contents. Initiating isdone here via introducing "new information,"i.e., "new-type" initiating. - to describe the author's attitude orrelationship to the text following (Bühler'sKundgabefunktion and Reiss' "expressive" textfunction) Example: I have already andrepeatedly presented you, my learned friends,with my new views of the motion and functionof the heart, in my anatomical lectures: buthaving now, for nine years

HEIDRUN GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST □ 29 and more confirmed these views by multiplieddemonstrations . . . I at length yield to therequests, I might say entreaties, of many, andhere present them for general consideration inthis treatise. William Harvey, An AnatomicalDisquisition on the Motion of the Heart andBlood in Animals. Chicago, 1952 (originallypublished in 1628), beginning of book.13 Inthis case, initiating serves to express theauthor's perspective of the following text. Itcontains some "new" information, featuring thetext topic, but also "given" information,featuring the author's perspective—an attitude

being "given" in the sense that the reader canidentify more readily with the personalrelationship or attitude, a (shared) feeling,value judgment allusion or irony. These are"given/new-types" of initiating. - to attractor "lure" the reader into reading the textfollowing (Bühler's Appellfunktion and Reiss'"vocative" text function): Example: If I begin chopping the foot of a tree, itsbranches are unmoved by my act, and its leavesmurmur as peacefully as ever in the wind. If,on the contrary, I do violence to the foot ofa fellow-man, the rest of his body instantlyresponds to the aggressions by movements ofalarm or defense. The reason for thisdifference is that the man has a nervoussystem, whilst the tree has none. WilliamJames, The Principles of Psychology. Chicago,1890/1952. Beginning of Chapter II. In thiscase the author intends to make the textinteresting to the reader. The initiatingstatements contain primarily "given"information in the sense that the reader"knows" the objects and/or events, feelings,value-judgements, allusions and/or ironyreferred to in the following in the text,i.e., it is a "given-type" initiation.

Like title conventions, the way in which atext is started, i.e., initiating is effected,varies cross-culturally. For ST texts,initiation typically serves the primaryfunction of being "informative" about 30 □ Contrastive Scientific and TechnicalRegister the text following, i.e., is "new-type"initiating. However, different ST registersmay allow varying ranges of secondary orflanking "given/new-type" or "given-type"initiating. Information Sequencing Information sequencing reflects an implicitauthor-reader contract in the way "given" and"new" information is chronologically oralternately arranged on a macro-level, i.e.,in the entire text. We can distinguish three basic types: - "new-type" information sequencing, which followscultural norms that require established,fairly rigid sequencing routines, proceedingfrom a set pattern of (1) "new" information(in the form of an argument, thesis ordefinition) that is theoretically developed(2). It may be substantiated by evidence (3)obtained on the basis of an acknowledged

methodology (4) depending on the normprevailing in a particular domain of science(natural sciences vs. humanities). "Given"information is optional or even uncommon.Texts like this are, therefore, difficult tofollow, "hard to read." An example for such"new-type" information sequencing isWittgenstein's Tractatus. - "given/new-type" information sequencingpresents the thesis and/or arguments as wellas other text segments embedded in "given"information e.g., in the form of examples,alternating "new" chunks of information with"given" portions, and making the text easierto read. In Toulmin's argumentation chain(1958:104) the "thesis" element is typicallyembedded in "given" information. - "given-type" information sequencingtypically begins with specific "given"information such as commonly-known phenomenaand develops the "new" information (thesis,general rule or definition) from there. Analbeit extreme example is Bonheim's article"What

HEIDRUN GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST □ 31

German Students Call their Cars," (German Lifeand Letters, 4/1984), featuring 57 "messages"( = predications), including 33 Illustrativeexamples: more than 50% of the article'smessage is examples. Author-oriented STregister tends to follow "new-type informationsequencing, starting with and developing "new"information; reader-oriented contracts, on theother hand, typically use "given-type"information sequencing, starting from theknown specific to the "new" information, witha possible use of alternately varying "new"with "given" information.14 INFORMATION PACKAGING Just as Information Dynamics describes theflow of text information, InformationPackaging depicts the way in which authors"wrap up" the "given" and "new" informationthey want to convey to their readers; it is astatic parameter, measuring how information ispresented to the reader at a particular stageof the text. Information Packaging parametersinclude:15 - the frequent use of examples ( ==illustrating the "new" message, by "framing"it into "given" information with which thereader is familiar)

- personalizing the message ( == establishingdirect contact with the reader by frequent useof direct addresses like "you," "imperatives,"and/or "rhetorical questions") - redundancies ( = coating "new" messages withinformation already "given" in the textitself) - reference (= the use of specific "given" vs.general information, which may create"closeness" vs. "distance") - terminological co-reference ( == thealternating use of quasisynonymous terms orparaphrases ( = "given") for technical

32 □ Contrastive Scientific and TechnicalRegister terms in an attempt to make the message morecomprehensible to the reader)- varying degrees of "formality" ( = the useof everyday speech and colloquialisms ( ="given") in ST texts, with which the readercan identify more easily than with Latin orGreek expressions commonly found in ST texts).On the basis of the Information Dynamics andInformation Packaging parameters shown in Fig.1 we can proceed to examine our centralhypothesis, i.e., that the generally

recognized more hermeneutic-abstract kind ofknowledge generation of German uses a moreauthor-oriented register when compared withthe more positivistic-pragmatic orientation ofEnglish which employs a more reader-orientedST register. We can describe and "measure"author-oriented ST register specifically inthat it typically presents large "chunks" of"new" information, using "newtype" title-,initiating-, and information sequencingdevices while reader-oriented ST registercaters to the reader by Packaging the "new"information into "given" information via suchdevices as the frequent use of examples,personalizing the message, using specificreference, redundancies, terminological co-reference and varying degrees of formality. Information Dynamics (i.e., Macro/Dynamic):Title conventions, Initiating Information,Sequencing Information Information Packaging (i.e., Micro/Static):Use of Examples, Personalization,Redundancies, Explicitness of Reference,Terminological Co-Reference, Formality.Figure 1: Information Dynamics and InformationPackaging Phenomena

HEIDRUN GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST □ 33 The Translation Dimension These differences in ST register maynecessitate a considerable amount ofadaptation in the way "given" and "new"information is proportioned, sequenced andpresented—i.e., "given" information isexpanded or reduced when it comes totranslating ST texts involving culturallydiverse ST registers. This can be illustratedusing examples from the English original andthe authorized German translation of theeconomic textbook Samuelson & Nordhaus,Economics. BASIC DECISIONS As stated previously, ST register phenomenahave mostly been treated from the interests ofteaching ST languages (Ulijn 1989) and havehardly been discussed as a cross-culturaltranslation problem (Reiss/Vermeer 1984,Newmark 1988, Hatim/Mason 1990). In fact,discourse phenomena in general—even withoutthe ST dimension—have hardly been treated intheir relevance to translation. Proceeding from the idea above, that a text'sfunction is reflected in its structure, which

can be described in terms of alternating"given" and "new" information arrangement,translating involves the basic decision as towhether the source text function must be keptconstant or can be varied (Reiss/Vermeer1984). Constancy or similarity of ST functionwould render a more "literal" or "faithful"translation while varying the ST functionmight imply a considerable restructuring ofthe information contained in the source textto make it fit the target ST register. Varyingthe translation function could possiblyinvolve changes in one or both parameters—Information Dynamics and Information Packaging—reflecting the different author-readercontracts. While Information Dynamics involvesrestructuring translation decisions on themacro-level of 34 □ Contraslive Scientific and TechnicalRegister texts, i.e., regarding what type of "given" or"new" information in which logical arrangementis transferred from source to target text,Information Packaging as a static parameterinvolves decisions on the micro-level oftexts, regarding the precise way in which"given" or "new" source text information is

presented in the target ST register. It isclear that the macro-level decisions affectingInformation Dynamics involve more re-structuring, i.e., possibly more adaptationthan the microlevel decisions involved inInformation Packaging. In concrete terms thismeans that translating ST texts from Germaninto English may involve expanding or evennewly creating ''given" information segmentsin texts, a problem that makes German→ EnglishST register translations much more difficult(one possible reason why it takes so long forGerman philosophical texts to be translatedinto English?). On the other hand,translations from English to German wouldinvolve adapting or reducing a lot of the"given" instances prominent in English STregister. For translation purposes, wetherefore need to first establish the targettext's function as being either source text-or target textoriented before we can discusspossible ST register problems. If it isdecided that the source text register is notto be maintained, Information Dynamics must beadapted to fit the target reader expectations,i.e., expanding (German→English translation)or reducing the "given" portions of

information (English→German translation). Ifthe source text register is to be maintained,no such restructuring on the macro-level hasto occur. As far as Information Packagingphenomena are concerned, contrastive STregister norms most probably do call forchanges in the "given"-"new" arrangements butthese are less fundamental since they affectthe micro-level of the text, and can HEIDRUN GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST □ 35thus be effected ad hoc. It is important tonote that the translation problems resultingfrom cross-culturally differing ST registerscannot be solved in absolute terms but onlyrelative to the basic decision of whether thetranslation function is to be kept constant (=no restructuring of "given"-"new" arrangementson the macro-level with possible ad hocrestructuring of Packaging phenomena) or is tobe adapted to fit the target culture ( =restructuring of "given"-"new" units on themacro- and micro-levels). In many cases, suchas in the following examples, these basicdecisions are not left to the translator tomake but are specified by publishing houses orauthors who want the translation done in acertain fashion. In our case, with Samuelson

being a Nobel prize winner, the Germantranslation was to preserve as much of theauthor's original "style" as possible. Thefollowing examples reflect this source-textorientation since no changes were made inInformation Dynamics, but some changes werenevertheless necessary on the micro-level.Translation Examples of ST Discourse PhenomenaINFORMATION DYNAMICS Title conventions As discussed above, a titleor subtitle can serve various functions in itsrelation to the following text with thefunction of the title usually depending oncultural conventions. In contrastive terms, it can be said thatGerman ST register norms call for new-typetitles (cf. Hellwig 1984:12), while English STtitles seem to be more flexible, serving thefunction of also attracting the reader byproviding him with "given" information. Thefollowing examples of sub-titles fromSamuelson & Nordhaus, Economics, clearlyfollow English ST register norms, exposing theGerman reader to a different cultural norm.(The English original is followed by theauthorized translation with page numbers fromeach given in parentheses.)

36 □ Contrastive Scientific and TechnicalRegisterEnglish OriginalGerman TranslationInside the Black Box: Aggre- Die 'blackbox' Makrogate Supply and Demand Okonomie vonInnen: Gesamtangebot(88) und Gesamtnachfrage(157), To TIP or not to TIP (253f) TIP oderkein TIP - das ist die Frage (383f)Consumers as Wizards? (415) Jeder Konsumentein Hexenmeister? (639)Roundaboutness (653f) DerProduktionsumweg (357f)Awash with profits (660f) Schwimmendie Unternehmen im Geld? (357f).In German, the "vocative" function inherent inthe translated subtitles do not all conformto ST register norms, although they were

largely preserved following the translationfunction of reflecting the source text-oriented register. Initiating Information English academic texts often seem to start outwith a very general statement, a practicalexample or a rhetorical question to "hook up"the "new" information following in the text tosomething that is "given," i.e., to "tune in"the reader with the topic the author is aboutto discuss. They thus often feature"given/new" or "given-type" initiation.Although this may not necessarily always bethe case, the English author seems to have thechoice, whereas German ST register normstypically call for initiating an academic textwith the object and aims of a study, i.e.,with "new-type" initiation. A fitting example, therefore, is thatSamuelson & Nordhaus start out their textbookwith the rhetorical question:

HEIDRUN GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST □ 37English Original GermanTranslation:

Why study economics? (3) Wozu soll manüberhaupt Wirtschaftswissenschaft studieren. Erfahrungsgemäß . . . (27). This question would seem rather unusual to aGerman student who at the point when he startsreading an introductory textbook has alreadymade his decision to study economics. Again,the German translation reflects the Englishreader oriented ST register norms but resortsto German "Packaging" norms to make the textless "alien" to German readers: in the presentcase by avoiding the direct address of thereader and using the depersonalized generalpro-form of man.Information Sequencing ST register in German follows a fairly rigid"new-type" information sequencing pattern,proceeding from information on the text's orstudy's object, aim and set-up to describingits methodology and results, presenting large"new" chunks of information in an orderlysequence expected by the academic reader. In

English ST register, on the other hand,information sequencing does not seem tonecessarily follow such a rigid sequence, butarranges "new" chunks of informationalternating with "given" information(examples, redundancies, specific reference;see below), thus helping the reader relate toand integrate the "new" messages withsomething already known. English ST registerthus seems to give the author a choice between"new," "given/new" or "given-type" informationsequencing. In Samuelson & Nordhaus, "given-type" information sequencing is primarily usedas illustrated in the following passage, whichappears under the subtitle "TransactionsDemand": 38 □ Contrastive Scientific and TechnicalRegisterEnglish Original: People and firms need money as a transactionsmedium. Households need money to buy groceriesand pay for electricity and fuel bills as wellas occasional large consumer durables. Firmsneed money to pay for materials and labor.These elements constitute the transactionsdemand for money . . . (315) The author firsttalks about people and firms and their needs

for money, thus progressing to explaining theconcept of the transactions demand for money.The German reader would expect that"transactions money" be defined or at least bethe topic of the subsequent paragraph or, inthis case, the chapter. The translationreflects English ST register in terms ofInformation Dynamics, although InformationPackaging was adapted to reflect German STnorms by making more frequent use ofnominalizations.German Translation: Die privaten Haushalte und die Unternehmenbrauchen Geld zur Abwicklung von Transkationen: DieHaushalte zum Einkauf von Lebensmitteln, zur Begleichung vonElektrizitäts-und Benzinrechnungen ebenso wiegelegentlich zum Kauf von langlebigen Konsumgütern. Die Unternehmen brauchen Geldzur Finanzierung von Material undArbeitskräften. Aus diesen Komponenten setzt sich die 'Nachfrage nachTransaktionsgeld' zusammen. (Vol. I, 488). We can see that target-text ST register normsdo not necessarily require information re-structuring on the macro-level, but that a

certain adaptation to ST register norms can beeffected by resorting to target-text Packagingnorms. Varying ST registers can thus betreated in the sense of a "displacedequivalent" (versetztes HEIDRUN GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST □ 39Äquivalent, Reiss/Vermeer 1984:160). INFORMATION PACKAGING Use of Examples The use of examples can be viewed from theperspective of their relative, dynamicfrequency vis-à-vis other segments of the textor in their absolute static function ofillustrating a "new" message by "en-coating"it into "given" information. The followingexample from Samuelson and Nordhausillustrates this category: English Original: But can misperceptions about wages and pricesreally lie behind deep depressions andpersistent bouts of unemployment? Did itreally take people a full decade to learn howhard times were in the Great Depression? LikeRip Van Winkle, did people fall asleep on thejob in 1929 and not wake up until fullemployment returned in 1943? (342) Here, theuse of the "given" information (Rip Van

Winkle) is combined with a set of rhetoricalquestions, which have an additionalpersonalizing effect on the reader. OriginalGerman ST register would probably not providesuch an example in an academic text, but inthe present German translation, Information Dynamics was kept and English ST registermaintained. German translation: Aber können Fehleinschätzungen über Lohn- undPreisentwicklungen wirklich tiefgreifendeRezessionen und anhaltend hohe Arbeitslosenquoten heraufbeschwören? Brauchteman wirklich ganze zehn Jahre urn zu begreifen, wieschlecht die Zeiten während der Weltwirtschaftskrise waren?Schliefen die Leute 1929 über ihrer Arbeit ein und wachten, wieder nach 20 Jahren aus dem Tiefschlaf wiedererwachende Rip vanWinkle, erst wieder 40 □ Contrastive Scientific and TechnicalRegisterauf, als 1943 wiederum Vollbeschäftigungherrschte? (Vol. 1, 529).

Apart from the fundamental question ofInformation Dynamics and InformationPackaging, the translation of examples isoften complicated by the fact that they areculture-specific. They can only fulfil theirfunction of providing the reader with "given"information, i.e., illustrative purposes, ifthe reader can relate to the quoted example.This may not be the case cross-culturally: RipVan Winkle is a less prominent figure inGermany than in the U.S. Among the fivestrategies suggested by translation theory(Koller 1979 162-166), a "defining paraphrase"was chosen in the German translation(indicated in italics above). Personalizing a Message A statement can be made more personal bydirectly addressing the reader using "you,""imperatives" and/or "rhetorical questions."The combination of these devices to render atext more "readable" are particularly frequentin Samuelson & Nordhaus: English OriginalExample: Be skeptical of approaches that claim to havefound the quick route to success. You can'tget rich by consulting the stars (althoughunbelievably, some investment advisers push

astrology onto their clients). (291) TheGerman translation eliminates the imperativeand the direct address, which are still veryuncommon even in general, common languagetexts and uses the impersonal man instead: German Translation: Bei allen Aussagen, die für sich beanspruchen,einen schnellen Weg zum Erfolg zu weisen, ist Vorsichtgeboten. Man kann nicht reich werden, wenn man auf die Sterne vertraut(obgleich es einigen Investment-Beratern wider besseresWissen gelungen ist, HEIDRUN GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST □ 41ihre Kunden für die Astrologie zu erwärmen).(Vol. I, 455) Redundancies Redundancy of information typically existswhen information that is already "given"earlier in the text is used to "coat" "new"information. English Original: While this view may have some microeconomicmerit, it misses the larger point that 'theessence of monetary control is to set legalreserve requirements too high'. By setting

them so high, the Fed can be assured thatbanks will not want to hold excess reservesand the Fed can thereby control the supply ofmoney. (274) In the first sentence "to set legal reserverequirements too high" is "new" informationupon being introduced, but "given" informationonce the reader gets to the second sentencewhich provides the reasons for such a Fedpolicy as "new" information. This "new"information in the second sentence is nowexplicitly "en-coated" into the reiteration ofthe previous sentence's information. In German ST register, redundancies byreiteration of information are generallyavoided. Instead, pronominal adverbs are oftenused to resume "given" information, leaving itto the reader to make the "linking" hypothesisbetween two sentences. This phenomenon isreflected in the following translation: GermanTranslation: Während diese Betrachtung mikroökonomischmöglicherweise Vorteile bietet, geht sie insofern amWesentlichen vorbei, als 'der Steuerung der Geldmenge der Grundsatzzugrunde liegt,

daß die Mindestreservesätze bewußt zu hochangesetzt werden.' Damit will die Zentralbank sicherstellen, daßdie Banken kein Interesse haben, darüber hinausÜberschußreserven zu halten und kontrolliert so die Geldmenge. (432) 42 □ Contrastive Scientific and TechnicalRegisterExplicitness of Reference As a discourse phenomenon, explicitness ofreference features the choice between specificvs. general reference. It seems to vary withmore or less reader-oriented contracts andinfluences "closeness" or "distance" betweenreader and author. Specific informationprovides security by increasing the reader'sability to identify, which leads to morecloseness than a general statement that isopen to interpretation. Generalization opensroom for doubt and thus insecurity, loweringthe ability to identify and leaving a greaterdistance between reader and author. By thispackaging parameter English ST register alsoseems to reflect a closer author-readerrelationship, as the following highlightedexamples of specific reference show:

Original English Example: An efficient market is one where all newinformation is quickly understood by marketparticipants and becomes immediatelyincorporated into market prices. For example,say that Lazy T-Oil Company has just struck oil in the Gulf ofAlaska. This is announced at 12:30 a.m. onTuesday. When will the price of Lazy T-'sshares rise? Wednesday morning after J.R. hasread the Wall Street Journal. Or perhaps afterlunch on Tuesday, when the stock analysts havehad time to chew it over a bit? Or perhaps aweek later, after Grandpa has placed his orderto his St. Louis broker? No, says theefficient market theory. (288) In German, STregister calls for general reference—inanalogy to the tenet that "good" theory needsto have a high level of generality and alongwith generality a high level of abstraction.Following this precept, this whole exampleparagraph would probably be omitted, since theinformation (i.e., that all new HEIDRUN GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST □43information is incorporated into the marketprices immediately) is already given in thefirst sentence. As a compromise between the

German norm and the desire to keep the source-oriented register, the specific references toLazy-T Oil Company and Grandpa were generalized. German Translation: Ein effizienter Markt liegt dann vor, wennneue Informationen rasch von den Marktteilnehmers absorbiert undsofort in die Marktpreise integriert werden. Nehmen wir zumBeispiel an, eine Ölgesellschaft im Golf von Alaska seigerade auf neue Ö1-vorkommen gestoßen. Diese Neuigkeit wird aneinem Dienstag mittag um 11.30 bekanntgegeben. Wann würdendie Aktienkurse der Ölgesellschaft steigen? AmMittwoch früh, nachdem J.R. Ewing die Nachricht im Wall Street Journalgelesen hat? Oder bereits am Dienstag nachmittag, wenn dieBörsenexperten in der Mittagspause Zeit genug hatten, die Neuigkeitzu verdauen? Vielleicht auch erst nach einer Woche, wennirgendwo irgendjemand eine entsprechende Orderbeim Börsenmakler plaziert? Die

Theorie des effizienten Marktes verneint alldiese Fragen . . . . (Vol. I, 451) Terminological Co-Reference Using alternating paraphrases ( = "given"information) for technical terms in an attemptto make the message more comprehensible to thereader is very common in ST register but canalso lead to vagueness (Gerzymisch-Arbogast1987, 1989). It is sometimes hard for the non-expert reader or translator to correlatealternating expressions to one underlying"meaning" of a term. English Original: 44 □ Contrastive Scientific and TechnicalRegisterWe summarize as follows: The demand for M (Ml)arises from our need for a medium of exchange,that is from a transactions demand. We holdcurrency and checking accounts to buy goodsand pay our bills. As our incomes rise, thevalue of the goods we buy goes up and wetherefore need more money for transactions,raising our demand for M. The transactionsdemand for M will be sensitive to the cost of holdingmoney. (317)

In this passage the demand for M (M1) is co-referent with demand for M and transactions demand for M, (with Mbeing set equal with Ml earlier). The resulting vagueness is keptin the following translation: German translation: Wir fassen also wie folgt zusammen: DieNachfrage nach Geld (Ml) entsteht aus dem Bedürfnis nach einemTauschmittel, das heißt, aus einem Bedarf an Transaktionsgeld.Wir halten Münzund Papiergeld, ebenso wiescheckfähige Einlagen zum Kauf von Gütern und zur Begleichung unsererRechnungen. Bei steigendem Einkommen steigt auch der Wert dergekauften Güter, und zur Abwicklung von Transaktionenbrauchen wir zusätzliches Geld. Damit steigt unsereNachfrage nach Ml. Die Nachfrage nach Transaktionsgeld reagiertempfindlich auf die Kosten für die Geldhaltung . . . . (Vol. I, 491). Varying Degrees of Discourse "Formality"

In English ST register, the line between thewritten and spoken modes of language does notseem to be as clear-cut as it is in German,where the use of everyday speech andcolloquialisms in ST texts is uncommon. Again,using "common language" can be viewed aspresenting the reader with something familiarfrom everyday

HEIDRUN GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST □45experience (= "given"), with which it iseasier and more comfortable to identify ratherthan with abstract Latin or Greek terms. Examples of "formality" are numerous inSamuelson & Nordhaus: English Original: Those who have studied the performance ofchartism say, 'The chartists generally end upwith holes in their shoes. So forget it. ' (291) German Translation: Erfahrene Investoren sind allerdings derMeinung, daß die Chartists auf verlorenem Posten stehen undihre Methode wenig Aussicht auf Gewinn verspreche. (Vol. I,455) Or the description of the 1929 stock marketcrash:

English Original: The bottom fell out of the market . . . . Themarket fell still further . . . . The soaring bull market was over. Thesagging bear (declining) market had taken its place. And as theformer had lived on its dreams, so the latter was consumed by its ownnightmares. (286). German Translation: Die Kurse fielen ins Bodenlose . . . . DerMarkt drückte die Kurse immer weiter . . . . Die phantastische Haussewar vorüber. An der Börse herrschte die Baisse. Und wie zuvor dieHausse vom Optimismus gelebt hatte, so wurdedie Baisse von dem durch sie hervorgerufenenPessimismus genahrt. (Vol. I, 448). The more "formal" pattern in German isachieved by: - the use of "dissociated" terms (Leisi1974:57ff) as in the case of the French terms Hausse and Baisse (for themetaphoric bull and bear markets) and expressions like Optimismus,Pessimismus)

- substituting colloquialisms for more formalexpressions (English: end up with holes in their shoes;forget it; German: auf

46 □ Contrastive Scientific and TechnicalRegisterverlorenem Posten stehen; wenig Aussicht aufGewinn versprechen); - lengthy premodifiers instead of relativeclauses (English: its own nightmares; German: den durch siehervorgerufenen Pessimismus). - "displaced" equivalents, i.e., using formalST register features wherever possible to balance the "colloquial"effect of the English original (like using complex functionverbs: 'keine zusätzlichen Mittel zur Verfügung haben'instead of just the verb verfügen). Concluding Remarks The examples quoted are neither complete norrepresentative.

Systematic analyses need to follow to includephenomena using the reverse direction, i.e.,German→English translations which involveconstant or varying translation functions andas such, ST register adaptations. It would beinteresting to investigate cases when "given"information needs to be added or expanded inEnglish to make original German texts more"readable." For instance, this might make itpossible to substantiate (or reject)Bettelheim's criticism of the translations ofFreud's works into English or at least explainwhy they impress the English reader as"abstract" and "scientific": [The erroneous orinadequate translation of many of the mostimportant original concepts of psychoanalysis]makes Freud's direct and always deeplypersonal appeals to our common humanity appearto readers of English as abstract,depersonalized, highly theoretical, erudite,and mechanized—in short, 'scientific'—statements about the strange and very complexworkings of our mind . . . . the translationsattempt to lure the reader into developing a'scientific' attitude toward man and hisactions, a HEIDRUN GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST □47

'scientific' understanding of the unconsciousand how it conditions much of our behavior.(Bettelheim:5) Perhaps the problem lies inthat Freud's excellent translators, forwhatever reason, did not make the necessaryswitch to the more reader-oriented English STregister by providing more "given"information! (Gerzymisch-Arogast 1992) NOTES 1. LSP is the acronym for Languages forSpecial Purposes, referring to all scientificand/or technical communication. 2. For reasons of space, this cannot bediscussed in detail in this paper. Theinterested reader will find detailed andformal "given"-"new" analyses in Gerzymisch-Arbogast (1987).3. It is a generally acknowledged fact thatEnglish scientific texts are "easier to read,"i.e., less theoretical and abstract than theirGerman counterparts. 4. Since no statistical material can bepresented, the problems discussed are of anexemplary nature and can thus only have aheuristic value. 5. Lewandowski (1985:833) still regardsregister to be "characteristicsyntactical and

lexical patterns, formed by speech events insimilar situations" (translation by H. G.-A.).Some authors identify it with style(Stilgattungen, Benes 1969) or languagevariety. The most fitting discussion seems tobe the London School's two-dimensionalapproach, differentiating between user-relatedlanguage varieties (such as geographical,temporal, social or idiolectal dialects) anduse-related varieties, i.e., registers(Halliday, Mcintosh and Strevens 1964).Catford's example is also interesting in thiscontext: "By register we mean a varietycorrelated with the performer's social role ona given occasion. 48 □ Contrastive Scientific and TechnicalRegisterEvery normal adult plays a series of differentroles—one man, for example, may function atdifferent times as head of a family, motorist,cricketer, member of a religious group,professor of biochemistry and so on, andwithin this idiolect he has varieties (sharedby persons and other idiolects appropriate tothese roles). When the professor's wife tellshim to 'stop talking like a professor', she is

protesting at a misuse of register" (Catford1965:89) 6. Representative of this trend are Drodz andSeibicke (1973), Bungarten (1981), and Fluck (1985). 7. A detailed and systematic account of theseLSP-markers in English can be found in Beier (1980:41-80). 8. This is typically epitomized by thetheme/rheme, topic/comment, given/newcontroversy over the appropriate level onwhich the phenomenon should be described (Is it asyntactic, semantic or pragmatic phenomenon?),resulting in a flood of inconclusive"definitions" of the concept. For reasons ofspace this will not be discussed here; adetailed account of the various approaches canbe found in Lutz (1981); cf. also Gerzymisch-Arbogast 1987:27-95). Cognitive "given-new"research in the US is largely process-oriented, focussing primarily on thepsycholinguistic dimension of the concept(Clark 1977) and the thematisation process indiscourse (Brown/Yule 1983) while Europeanapproaches generally focus on the (formal)description of the phenomenon (Mudersbach 1981

as applied in Gerzymisch-Arbogast 1987;Sgall/Hajicova 1987).9. This may be done by a variety of thematicprogression types (Danes 1970, Gerzymisch-Arbogast 1987) withthe static constant theme progression beingregarded as typical for LSP communication(Benes 1981). We expand this idea here bysuggesting that, within the universalprogression types, LSP texts seem to bedifferently HEIDRUN GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST □49"organized" in terms of "given-new"information chunks and that this variance isculture-specific. For instance, in German itis common practice to start out an academictext or article with "new information," i.e.,proceeding from (1) (intended) subject areaand (2) (intended) objective of the study,followed by its methodology, set-up andorganization, which seems to be different inEnglish. 10. This version of a "given-new" contractbetween author and reader extends the notiondescribed by Clark/Havilland (1974) and Clark (1977), in that it proceeds from therelative parameter of indi

vidual perspectives of the communicativepartners (Mudersbach 1981 as applied inGerzymisch-Arbogast 1987) as a fundamentalprerequisite for describing informationprocessing in a successful communicationprocess. 11. Grice proceeds from five conversationalmaxims: "Make your conversational contribution such asis required, at the stage at which it occurs,by the accepted purpose or direction of thetalk exchange in which you are engaged."(1975:45) Of the other four maxims (Quantity, Quality,Relation and Manner), at least the "manner"principle seems to be open to culturalvariation: "Finally, under the category ofMANNER, which I understand as relating not(like the previous categories) to what is saidbut, rather, to HOW what is said is to besaid, I include the supermaxim - 'Beperspicuous' and various maxims such as: 1.Avoid obscurity of expression, 2. Avoidambiguity, 3. Be brief (avoid unnecessaryprolixity), 4. Be orderly." (Grice 1975:46) We can see that 3.) and 4.) certainly are notabsolute standards (does "being brief" have

the same value in Spanish as in English and iswhat is considered "orderly" in German thesame as in English?), but may vary withculture. It is interesting to note that the 50 □ Contrastive Scientific and TechnicalRegistercooperative principle is sometimesintentionally violated to provoke thealienating effect in modern absurd plays (cf.Gerzymisch-Arbogast 1988).12. For a more detailed description of titlefunctions and their relevance in translation,see Nord (1988). 13. This is—after dedications—the beginning ofHarvey's famous book and must not be confusedwith "The author's motives for writing," whichfollows later as a separate Chapter I. 14. Examples for this parameter have beenomitted here because of space restrictions. 15. Again for reasons of space, examples havebeen omitted. 16. The problems of cross-cultural specificityof objects and/or events or proper names isnot limited to translation theory (Newmark[1981:70-83] provides a detailed account), buthas interestingly also been raised in contextsthat are not necessarily primarily

translationoriented such as in Hofstadter, D.(1979:379): Gödel, Escher, Bach: An EternalGolden Braid. 17. Using imperatives is particularlyinfrequent in German and is not even used intexts with a typical "imperative," i.e.,directive message, like fire escape directionsor cookbook recipes, which use infinitive orimpersonal constructions instead. Un-restructured direct translation of Englishimperatives into German imperatives cantypically result in unacceptability of themessage. For example, the translations of USmanagement guides or textbooks notoriouslysell badly in German translation. This may bebecause it would belittle and offend theGerman reader to be directly ordered to dothings, especially at the management level. AsGüttinger (1963:138) puts it, "[der Lesermöchte nicht] durch das ganze Buch hindurchmit 'du' angerempelt [werden]." 18. Lyons (1977:1) sets an example by hisconvention to use terms only in their definedsense and marking them accordingly, a strategythat would certainly be most welcome bytranslators of ST texts. REFERENCES

Examples: The examples are largely taken from Samuelson,P. & W.D. Nordhaus, Economics. New York:McGraw Hill, 1985, and its German version,Volkszvirtschaftslehre, Band 1, Köln, 1987,translated by Johanna Frenzel and HeidrunGerzymisch-Arbogast in collaboration with Dr.Gottfried Frenzel.Dictionaries: Lewandowski, T. Linguistisches Wörterbuch.Heidelberg, 1985. Linguistic References: Beaugrande, R. de and W.U. Dressler..Einführung in die Textlinguistik. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1973. Beier, R. Englische Fachsprache. Stuttgart:Kohlhammer, 1980. Benes, E. "Zur Typologie der Stilgattungen derwissenschaftlichen Prosa." Deutsch als Fremdsprache, 6 (1969):225-233. —. "Die formale Struktur derwissenschaftlichen Fachsprachen insyntaktischer Hinsicht," Bungarten, 185-212.Bettelheim, B. Freud and Man's Soul. New York:Knopf, 1982. Brown, G. and G. Yule DiscourseAnalysis. Cambridge/New York:

Cambridge University Press, 1983. Bühler, K. Sprachtheorie. DieDarstellungsfunktionen der Sprache. Stuttgart:G. Fischer, 1965. Bungarten, T.,ed. Wissenschaftssprache.Beitrage zur Methodologie, theoretischenFundierung und Deskription. Munich: 1981. Catford, J.C. A Linguistic Theory ofTranslation. Oxford: Oxford University Press,1965. Clark, H.H. "Comprehension and the Given-NewContract." Discourse Production andcomprehension. Freedle, R.O., ed. Norwood:Ablex Publications Corporation, 1977. Clark, H.H.and S.E. Haviland. "What's New? Acquiring NewInformation as a Process in Comprehension," inJournal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 13 (1974): 512-521. Daneš, F. "Zur linguistischen Analyse derTextstruktur." Folia Linguistica. 4 (1971): 72-78. Drozd, W. and W. Seibicke. Deutsche Each- undWissenschaftssprache. Wiesbaden: Oscar Brandstetter Verlag, 1973. Fluck, H.R. Fachsprachen. Einführung undBibliographic Munich: UTB,

1985. Gerzymisch-Arbogast, H. (1987a) Zur Thema-Rhema-Gliederung in amerikanischenWirtschaftstexten. Eine exemplarische Analyse.Tübingen: Narr, 1987. —. (1987b) "Passepartoutwörter alsfachsprachliches Übersetzungsproblem."TEXTconTEXT. 1/2 (1987): 23-31.—. (1988) "Das Absurde in den Dramen HaroldPinters. Versuch einer Erklärung aus linguistischer Sicht." DieNeueren Sprachen. 4/88 (1988): 405-421. —. (1989a) "The Role of Sense Relations inTranslating Vague Business and Economic Texts." Translation andLexicography. Bennani, B. and M. Snell-Hornby, eds. Missouri: Paintbrush,1989. —. (1989b) "Standardisierte Wörterbuchartikeldes allgemeinen einsprachigen Wörterbuches alsTexte:Probleme der Kohärenz und der Thema-Rhema-Struktur." Wörterbücher-Dictionaries - Dictionaries. An International Encyclopedia of Lexicography.New York: de Gruyter,

1989. —. (1992) "Die wissenschaftliche Prosa SigmundFreuds im Spiegel der englischen Übersetzungen" Unpublishedhabilitation lecture, University of Heidelberg. —. (1993) "Zur Erschließung und Übersetzungvon Termini in fachlichen Texten" ForumFachsprache. Tübingen: Narr Verlag (in press).Grice, H.P. "Logic and Conversation," Syntaxand Semantics III. Speech Acts. Cole, P. and J. Morgan, eds. New York:1975. 41-58. Güttinger, F. Zielsprache. Zürich: Manesse,1963. Hajicova, E. and P. Sgall. "Topic and focus ofa sentence and the patterning of a text," Text and DiscourseConstitution. J. Petoefi, ed. Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1988. 70-96. Halliday, M.A.K., A. McIntosch and P. StrevensThe Linguistic Sciences and Language Teaching. London: Longman, 1964. Hatim, B. and I. Mason. Discourse and theTranslator. London: Longman, 1990.

Hellwig, P. "Titulus oder über denZusammenhang von Titeln und Texten." Zeitschrift für germanistischeLinguistïk. 12.1 (1984): 1-20. Hoffmann, L. Kommunikationsmittel Fachsprache.Eine Einführung. Berlin: VEB, 1985. Hofstadter, D. Gödel, Escher and Bach: AnEternal Golden Braid. New York: Vintage Books, 1989. Koller, W. Einführung in dieÜbersetzungswissenschaft. Wiesbaden: Quelle und Meyer, 1987(3). Leisi, E. Das heutige Englisch. Heidelberg: C.Winter, 1974. Lutz, L. Zum Thema 'Thema'. Einführung in dieThema-Rhema-Theorie. Hamburg: Hamburg Buchagentur, 1981. Lyons, J. Semantics. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1977. Mudersbach, K. "Ein neues Rhema zum Thema:Thema-Rhema". Heidelberg, 1981. (unpublished)Newmark, P. (1981) Approaches To Translation.Oxford, New York: Pergamon, 1981.

—. (1988) A Textbook of Translation. New York:Prentice Hall, 1988. Nord, Ch. "Der Titel - Ein Mittel zum Text."Akten des linguistischen Kolloquiums Berlin. Reiter, N., ed. Louvain:Peters, 1988. 519-528. Reiss, K. Texttyp und Übersetzungsmethode. Deroperative Text. Heidelberg: Groos, 1976. — and H.J. Vermeer Grundlegung einerallgemeinen Translationstheorie. Tubingen: Niemeyer, 1984. Sager, J.C., D. Dungworth, and P.F. McDonaldEnglish Special Languages. Wiesbaden: Brandstetter, 1980. Snell-Hornby, M. Translation Studies.Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1988. —, ed. Übersetzungswissenschaft - EineNeuorientierung. Tübingen: UTB, 1976. Toulmin, S. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge:University of Cambridge Press, 1958. Ulijn, J.M. "The Scientific and TechnicalRegister and its Cross-linguis

tic Constants and Variants." ActaUniversitatis Wratislaviensis. No. 1130 (1989): 183-231.