The parameter
Definiteness measures whether a language has a dedicated grammatical device signaling that the referent of a noun phrase is identifiable to the addressee. The device may be a free word or an affix on the noun. What matters is not whether the notion of identifiability exists, which it does everywhere, but whether the grammar obliges the speaker to register it on every noun phrase.
Two clarifications keep the parameter honest. An article-less language is not an imprecise one: Russian, Turkish, Japanese and Mandarin all distinguish known from new referents, using word order, demonstratives, case and context. The marking is available rather than compulsory. And definiteness is not specificity: a speaker can have a particular individual in mind without assuming the hearer can identify it, and Turkish grammaticizes that instead, marking a specific direct object with the accusative suffix (Enç 1991).
The four-way division also flattens variation in coverage: article languages differ on generics, abstract nouns and institution names, so two of them still select differently across much of the noun inventory.
How languages vary
- Definite and indefinite articles: English, German, French, Spanish, Italian, Dutch, Hungarian, Modern Greek.
- Definite article only: Standard Arabic (al-), Hebrew (ha-).
- Affixal article: Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, Romanian, Bulgarian, Macedonian, Albanian, Basque, where the marker is a suffix on the noun.
- No articles: Russian, Polish, Czech, Latin, Finnish, Turkish, Japanese, Korean, Mandarin.
Dryer's WALS chapter 37 samples 620 languages: 216 have a definite word distinct from the demonstrative, 69 use a demonstrative as the marker, 92 have a definite affix, 45 have an indefinite article only, and 198 have neither. Chapter 38 samples 534: 102 have an indefinite word distinct from the numeral for "one", 112 use that numeral, 24 have an indefinite affix, 98 have a definite article only, and 198 have neither. That last figure is the one to keep: having no articles at all is among the most common states in the sample, which makes the European article system a regional habit rather than a default.
Consequences for translation
Between two article languages, the systems correspond and the selections do not. German takes the definite article for generic reference where English takes zero. This is Catford's intra-system shift in its purest form: the category exists on both sides, and the formally corresponding term is the wrong one.
Out of an article-less language the operation is heavier. Nothing in a Russian or Turkish noun phrase decides between "the decision" and "a decision", so the translator supplies a value the source never carried. That is obligatory explicitation, and it is the highest-frequency forced decision in these pairs, recurring several times a sentence for the length of the document. Three consequences follow.
It cannot be revised monolingually. A reviser reading only the target sees fluent English and no error. Whether "the applicant's residence permit" was warranted is visible only against the source.
Stored segments carry the wrong article. Definiteness depends on what came earlier in the text, not on the segment. An article correct in the first document is a claim about the facts in the second.
In official documents the choice allocates identity. "The child", "the agreement", "the property" assert that a specific one has already been identified. Where the source is indeterminate and the target will not let it stay so, the professional response is a note, not a silent selection. Reaching for a definite article to make a sentence read smoothly is particularization, and in binding text it narrows the reference.
Examples
RU>EN
- Source: Договор подписан.
- Target: The contract has been signed.
- Comment: Russian has no article and the sentence is complete without one. English forces a choice between "the contract" and "a contract". In a file containing several, that choice says which obligation was entered into.
TR>EN
- Source: Bir kitap okudum. / Bir kitabı okudum.
- Target: I read a book. / I read one of the books.
- Comment: The accusative suffix on the second form marks the object as specific: the speaker has a particular book in mind, usually from a set already in play. English has no article carrying that value, so "the book" is often too strong and "a book" too weak.
DE>EN
- Source: Das Leben ist kurz.
- Target: Life is short.
- Comment: Both languages have a definite article. German selects it for generic reference, English selects zero. "The life is short" is available only with a particular life in view, which is not what the source said.
AR>EN
- Source: كتاب / الكتاب
- Target: a book / the book
- Comment: Arabic marks definiteness with a prefix and has no indefinite article, so translating into Arabic the English "a" disappears.
References
- Dryer, M. S. (2013). "Definite Articles." In M. S. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (eds), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, chapter 37. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
- Dryer, M. S. (2013). "Indefinite Articles." In WALS Online, chapter 38.
- Lyons, C. (1999). Definiteness. Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Enç, M. (1991). "The Semantics of Specificity." Linguistic Inquiry 22(1), 1–25.
- Comrie, B. (1989). Language Universals and Linguistic Typology, 2nd edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.