5. Analysis
5.3. Grammatical form and syntactic structures of seem and appear and their
53 Figure 7. Sense groups of seem and appear.
Note that there are several additional subsets and overlap relations between subsets within the large sense group for seem that are not shown in this illustration.
5.3. Grammatical form and syntactic structures of seem and appear and their
54
kept the semantic or modal meaning, make up about a quarter (23 %) of the correspondences for appear, and about a fifth (21 %) of the correspondences for seem. Zero correspondences, i.e.
omissions or significant restructuring of clauses with a clear loss of evidential and modal meaning, are the least frequent correspondences. Even so, in more than one in ten sentences (16 % for seem and 14 % for appear) the modal or evidential element disappears in the translation.
5.3.1. Congruent correspondences
More than half the sentences with appear are translated with a congruent correspondence (60 %).
For seem the number of congruent correspondences is even higher: 65 % of the translations are done by way of a congruent expression. For both seem and appear, approximately two thirds of the
congruent correspondences are lexical verbs. They include simple verbs (synes, virke), complex verbs (late til) and phrasal verbs (gi inntrykk av). The most frequent congruent correspondences are late til, se ut som/til, synes and virke for seem and virke som, se ut som/til, and synes for appear, which suggest that if we go by frequency alone, the two expressions would be practically synonyms. (68) and (69) are examples of congruent correspondences of seem and appear in which the original construction with anticipatory it plus a that clause is kept in the translation (68) and the construction with a nominal subject in thematic position is retained in the translation (69).
(68) It was an uncertain profession, of course, and nothing was guaranteed, but it seemed that he had the gift. (AB1)
Det var et usikkert yrke, selvfølgelig, og ingenting var garantert, men det virket som han hadde talent. (AB1T)
(It was an uncertain profession, of course, and nothing was guaranteed, but it seemed that he had talent)
(69) But he was lonely, polite, and he appeared to be fond of the little girl, and Martine, thinking of the room she had vacated in the rue Washington, took courage and ended her connection with France. (AB1)
Men han var ensom, høflig, han syntes å være glad i den lille piken, og Martine, som tenkte på rommet hun hadde forlatt i Rue Washington, tok mot til seg og brøt forbindelsen med Frankrike. (AB1T)
(But he was lonely, polite, he appeared to be fond of the little girl…..)
5.3.2. Non-congruent correspondences
About a quarter of the sentences with appear (23 %) and a fifth of the sentences with seem (21 %) are non-congruent correspondences. A further analysis of the correspondences shows that seem and appear differ when it comes to which non-congruent expressions they co-occur with. Seem is found to have a wider range of non-congruent correspondences, which indicates that seem is more vague than appear, and possibly more difficult to translate. Below are listed the non-congruent correspondences found in my material.
Restructuring to make the experiencer (oblique object) the subject
A common translation strategy is to restructure the clause and make the explicit or implicit
experiencer of the original sentence the subject in the translation. The subject is typically combined with a perception verb of a mental process: tenke ('think'), føle ('feel'), synes ('have an opinion') and mene ('think', 'have an opinion'). In the translation pairs included in this study, there are several examples with syens (70) and one example with mene (71).
55
(70) It seemed to her to be too white, too soft, too spotty. (FW1)
Hun syntes den var for hvit, for bløt, med for mange føflekker. (FW1T) (She thought it was too white, too soft, with too many spots.)
(71) It seemed obvious to Aristotle that Plato had brought abstruse philosophical theories into his Phaedo, Symposium, and Timaeus that could not have been held by the unprepossessing figure of the Socrates he had dramatized in these works and his Republic and that they had to have originated with Plato himself. (JH1)
Aristoteles mente det var åpenbart at Platon hadde trukket dunkle filosofiske teorier inn i sin Faidon, Symposion og Timaios som ikke kunne vært tatt med av den lite vinnende Sokrates-skikkelsen som han hadde dramatisert i de verkene og i Republikken, og at de måtte hatt sitt utspring hos Platon selv. (JH1T)
(Aristotle thought/had the opinion that it was obvious that Plato had brought questionable philosophical theories into his Phaedo, Symposium, and Timaeus……) In the Norwegian translations, the effect of making the oblique object the grammatical subject is similar to the effect of a raised subject (a subject that has been raised from a subordinate clause to a subject position in a matrix clause). The restructuring has the effect of highlighting the experiencer by placing the experiencer in a thematic position (3.3.3.)
In my material, this construction does not occur as a correspondence for appear. This corroborates the findings from Semantic Mirrors that this sense of personal opinion and judgement of a similarity is unique to seem. Moreover, it strengthens the hypothesis that appear is used less frequently to convey opinions and personal judgement (epistemic modality) than seem.
It is worth pointing out at this point that the congruent expression in (69) hand syntes å være, may be the most literal and formal equivalent translation of seem and appear in catenative constructions.
However, this translation does come across as a more unconventional grammatical form than the non-congruent forms above (even more so if the experiencer is explicated, e.g. in han syntes meg å være, a rather archaic form in Norwegian, of which there are no examples in my data). Restructuring the clause to avoid a marked form in the target text is a common translation strategy. Making the experiencer the grammatical subject of the clause keeps the semantic and pragmatic meaning, and makes the Norwegian correspondence not as marked grammatically as it would otherwise be.
Restructuring with dummy subject det (dummy it)
Another frequent type of non-congruent correspondence is to restructure a clause with a nominal subject into a clause with dummy det as subject in thematic position and the real subject in a lower position in the clause (72) and (73). These non-congruent correspondences are examples of how a raised subject in the English original becomes a non-raised subject in the Norwegian correspondence.
See 3.3.3.
(72) "Nothing that I know of," he replied with a smile, but people seem to think there 's something wrong with my eyes." (OS1)
"Ikke noe som jeg vet om", svarte han med et smil, "men det virker som folk tror det er noe i veien med synet mitt." (OS1T)
(Not something that I know of, he replied with a smile, but it seems as if people believe there is something wrong with my sight)
56
(73) The law can appear to be broken when some metastable store of internal energy is tapped, as when a match is struck, or a piece of plutonium experiences nuclear fission, but once used up the energy cannot be recovered. (JL1)
Det kan se ut som om denne loven blir brutt når man kan tappe et metastabilt forråd av indre energi, som for eksempel når man tenner en fyrstikk eller la et stykke plutonium gjennomgå en kjernefysisk fisjon.
Men når energien først er oppbrukt, kan den ikke gjenvinnes.(JL1T)
(It can look as if this law is broken when one can tap a metastable store of inner energy…)
The effect of changing the syntactic structure from a nominal subject to a dummy subject is mostly pragmatic and has to do with stance (5.2.2.). Dummy det-constructions are more impersonal and signal more distance between the speaker's modal assessment of the propositional content. The structural change can also affect epistemicity. In the original English sentence above (72), the speaker clearly offers an opinion (albeit tentatively) of what he believes people think, and seem signals epistemic modality. In the Norwegian translation with a dummy subject det, it is less clear whether the speaker's assessment of what people think is primarily based on evidence, and therefore evidential, or on speaker's opinion, and thus epistemic.
Non-congruent correspondences, in which the English original clauses are restructured to become clauses with anticipatory or dummy it, are relatively more frequent with appear than seem. In three of the nine non-congruent correspondences for appear (33 %) and seven of the 56 non-congruent expressions for seem (13 %), these are the changes that are made.
Translations with a modal particle
Only seem is translated with a modal particle (74). Translations in which the epistemic modal or evidential meaning is conveyed in Norwegian by modal particles visst, nok, vel or liksom are found in 21 translation pairs (8 %) with seem, see Table 1 in section 4.5.
(74) "You seem to be unaware," he said, "that this is a private lounge. (AH1)
"De vet visst ikke at dette er et privat oppholdsrom for leger", sa han. (AH1T) ("You know [modal particle] not that this is a private lounge for doctors", said he.) The fact that modal particles are correspondences for seem testifies to the modal quality of seem. It is worth pointing out that the modal particles have different meanings and cannot be used
interchangeably. The modal particle visst signals inference based on some source of evidence. The core meaning of liksom has to do with similarity and comparison, and functions as an approximator like ' in a way' or 'sort of', and the mode of knowing is perception (Johansson, 2001). Vel, nok (and jo) signal speaker's commitment with no connection to evidence and are arguably more epistemic. The function of all the particles is to reduce the speaker's commitment to the truth of the proposition. In other words, they show epistemic modality, but it can be argued that visst is more evidential in nature. The findings form my analysis thus support the findings from the Semantic Mirrors-analysis in this thesis: that seem has several distinct senses, one of which is more evidential than the other, and
57
two of which are more epistemic than those of appear, as shown by the difference in how many correspondences are translations with a modal particle.
Modal adjunct
In some of the non-congruent correspondences, seem and appear are translated with an adjective phrase with modal or evidential meaning (75) or a prepositional phrase functioning as a modal adjunct (76).
(75) So a snarling, spitting, clawing prey is given rather more respect than it may appear to deserve. (DM1)
Derfor vises et snerrende, frådende og klorende bytte større respekt enn det tilsynelatende fortjener. (DM1T)
(Therefore a snarling, frothing, clawing prey is shown greater respect than it apparently deserves.)
(76) The answer to this old dilemma seems to lie in the nature of Darwin's world. (SJG1) Løsningen på dette gamle problemet ligger etter alt å dømme innebygd i den darwinistiske verdens spesielle egenart. (SJG1T)
(The solution to this old problem lies – judging by all signals – built into the Darwinian world's special characteristics that are unique to it.)
The Norwegian correspondences with modal adjuncts are both epistemic and evidential. They weaken the speaker's commitment to the truth value of the proposition, but they also clearly refer to visual evidence (e.g. tydelig, klart, åpenbart, which can all be glossed as 'clearly' or 'evidently') or an inference (judgement based on some kind of evidence). In my material, evidential adjuncts occur as correspondences for both appear and seem, whereas the expression etter alt å dømme, which is more epistemic, only occurs as a correspondence of seem.
Modal auxiliaries
Both seem and appear are sometimes translated with a modal auxiliary. In most of the translation pairs with a modal auxiliary, the modal auxiliary co-occurs with another frequent or prototypical correspondence e.g. se ut som (77). The modal auxiliary gives an added effect of hedging, but the evidential meaning is conveyed by the lexical verb. In five of the translation pairs with seem (9 % of the non-congruent correspondences) the modal auxiliary was the only correspondence of the verb (78). A modal auxiliary on its own is never a correspondence for appear. (79) is an example of a non-congruent correspondence with a modal auxiliary and a cognitive verb in a significant restructuring of the syntax, from a passive construction in the English original to an active, but impersonal pronoun in the translation.
(77) The law can appear to be broken when some metastable store of internal energy is tapped, as when a match is struck, or a piece of plutonium experiences nuclear fission, but once used up the energy cannot be recovered. (JL1)
Det kan se ut som om denne loven blir brutt når man kan tappe et metastabilt forråd av indre energi, som for eksempel når man tenner en fyrstikk eller la et stykke
58
plutonium gjennomgå en kjernefysisk fisjon. Men når energien først er oppbrukt, kan den ikke gjenvinnes. (JL1T)
(It can look as if this law is broken when …..)
(78) "I do n't seem to remember your ever giving Molly much of a chance," said Frederick. (DL1)
"Jeg kan ikke huske at du noensinne har gitt Molly noen særlig sjanse," sa Frederick.
(DL1T)
("I cannot remember that you have ever given Molly any particular chance, said Frederick.")
(79) The answer seems to be that humans made the face. (CSA1)
Rent umiddelbart skulle man tro at det må være mennesker som har tegnet dette ansiktet. (CSA1T)
(At first glance, one would assume that people must have drawn this face.) Modal auxiliaries as correspondences to seem and appear are rare, both as an independent
correspondence and in combination with a prototypical correspondence. There are six in all for seem and two in all for appear (see frequency list in 4.4.). This suggests that that the modal auxiliaries are not well suited to convey the same type of modality as seem and appear. It also suggests that the epistemic modal or evidential meaning and pragmatic function of seem and appear are unique, and that seem and appear fill a gap in the modal system.
Comparative expressions and hypotheticals
As discussed in Chapter 3, seem and appear are both used to make comparisons. They can relate the propositional content to an imaginary situation or a situation that may not be true but that is likely or possible (3.3.1.) or an unreal or improbable situation (3.2.9). Both verbs are used as expressions to relate the proposition to an imagined or possible truth (hypotheticals). Comparisons are also made between how something how something looks or is perceived to some established notion, like a rumour, a documented truth or an image. These are the more straight-forward comparisons (3.2.10).
While translations of appear frequently use an evidence-based verb (like the Norwegian
correspondence se ut som ('look like') in (81), only translations of seem are done with copular verbs (80). Norwegian correspondences in the form of comparative expressions include the copular verbs være ('be') and bli ('become') and the conjunction som ('as' or 'like').
(80) She seemed to know that neither crying nor sulking ever got anyone anywhere. (RD1) Det var som om hun skjønte at det ikke nyttet verken å gråte eller sutre. (RD1T) (It was as if she realized that it was no use to cry or sulk.)
These findings support the findings from the Semantic Mirrors-analysis that the sense partition of not just looking like something else, but being like something else is unique for seem. Comparative
59
constructions with copular være ('be') or bli ('become'), are predominantly expressions of personal opinion based on one's own perception, the evidence they are based on is less clear.
Both seem and appear have correspondences that are comparative expressions involving the sensory verb se ut som ('look like') which clearly indicates/denotes knowledge derived from sensory evidence (81) and (82). The use of a sensory verb plus a conjunction is an established strategy for expressing lesser reliability (Chafe, 1986: 267).
(81) They have special glands around their eyes for getting rid of excess salt, which is why they appear to cry when out of water. (ML1)
Rundt øynene har de spesielle kjertler som skiller ut overskudd av salt. Det er derfor de ser ut som om de gråter når de kommer opp av vannet. (ML1T)
(…. That is why they look as if they cry when they come out of the water.) (82) David seemed to wince and suffer, but he had to face it: what mattered was the
house and the life that would be lived in it. (DL1)
David så ut som om han krympet seg og led, men han måtte innrømme det: Det som betydde noe, var huset og det liv som skulle leves i det. (DL1T)
(David looked as though he cowered and suffered, but he had to face it…)
5.3.3. Zero correspondences
Appear disappears from the translations in 16 % of the translation pairs, through omissions or restructuring of the clause with significant loss of evidential meaning (see example (60) in 4.3.1). In one translation pair categorized as a zero correspondence, appear is a lexical verb whose main communicative function is to convey the semantic meaning of the word: 'to become visible' or 'to show signs of something' (83) with no evidential or modal meaning, but this use of appear is a marginal case is my analysis.
(83) Evelyn kept calm and refused to appear to worry: Ted was far from calm, and would declaim his anxieties to anyone who would listen. (MD1)
Evelyn tok det rolig og nektet å vise at hun var bekymret. Ted var langt fra rolig, han snakket om sine bekymringer til alle og enhver som ville høre på ham. (MD1T) (Evelyn kept calm and refused to show that she was worried.)
14 % of the correspondences of seem in my material are zero correspondences. This is in line with Johansson's (2001: 221) observation, that "the English word seem sometimes seems to disappear without a trace in translations into Norwegian and likewise might be added, seemingly without any motivation, by English translators in rendering Norwegian original texts".
Zero correspondences with seem are omissions or significant restructuring of clauses with a clear loss of evidential and modal meaning (see example (59) in 4.3.1). However, in some of the translations pairs with seem categorized as zero correspondences, the modality or evidentiality conveyed by seem is lost, but the translation retains some of the modality through other lexical items or
contextual clues. For example, in (84), seem is chosen as copular verb in the original English sentence to convey epistemic modality. In addition to seem, the adjective probable conveys epistemic
60
modality and introduces uncertainty about the propositional content. In the translation, the Norwegian equivalence of copular be (være) and the adjective sannsynlig ('probably') are used, and some epistemic modality is retained because of the adjective. However, there is no doubt that the degree of uncertainty conveyed when we say that something seems probable is greater that when we say that something is probable. Because of this loss of epistemic meaning, the construction is classified as a zero correspondence, even though the epistemicity is not completely gone.
(84) Accurate numbers are difficult to estimate, but it seems probable that the Library contained half a million volumes, each a handwritten papyrus scroll.
(CSA1)
Det er vanskelig å angi nøyaktige tall, men det er sannsynlig at biblioteket omfattet en halv million titler, det vil si håndskrevne papyrusmanuskripter.
(CSA1T)
(It is difficult to provide exact numbers, but it is probable that the library contained half a million titles…)
In other examples, zero correspondence with seem does not necessarily result in loss of meaning. For example, in (85), the verbs seem and hear are both perception verbs, and what they convey is
sensory evidence and the experience of the experiencer: a dizzying feeling and echoing voices. In the Norwegian translation, seem is dropped completely. However, it is clear from the context and the narrative style, that what is stated in the proposition is the experience of the experiencer.
(85) The room seemed to swim and he heard both his and Tom's voice echoing. (MM1) Alt rundt ham fløt, og ekkoet fra hans egen og Toms stemme ringte i ørene. (MM1T) (Everything around him was floating, and the echo from his own [voice] and Tom's voice rang in the ears.)
The fact that appear has a higher number of zero correspondences than seem may be an indicator that it is less modal that seem, and therefore more easily dropped in translation.