English Word Formation Patterns and Translation thereof in the Institutional Register

Translation of institutional texts is a challenge for translators due to the importance of conveying the meaning of the context as accurately as possible. The production of a good translation of official documents such as regulations that reflect the institutional register requires consideration of differences in the source and target languages in terms of syntax and lexis. As often as not, this results in transformations in sentence structure and word formation. English word formation, due to different language characteristics differs from Lithuanian in many ways. Although the definition of word formation is quite similar: ‘Word-formation’ is a traditional label, and one which is useful, but it does not generally cover all possible ways of forming everything that can be called a ‘word‘.” (Bauer, 1983:9). The theoretical part of this paper discusses the main word formation types for the English and the Lithuanian languages. The second, empirical part, deals with the analysis of word formation types in the English language, their transformations in the Lithuanian language and the most common transformation patterns. For the purpose, data from original bilingual documents of the European Union representing the institutional register were collected from EUR-Lex database. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.sal.0.26.12424


Register and Technical Translation
The institutional register is a language style that is characteristic of communication between institutions.Official documents have to be written in a highly formal, concise and accurate language, irrespective of the subject areas the documents may cover.Likewise, the translation of documents that represent the institutional register should render the point accurately and concisely while retaining the level of the formality of the original text.The current paper focuses on the study of bilingual documents retrieved from the database of EUR-Lex, the subject areas of which range from external agreements to legislation in force and other law-related materials.
The paper highlights English word formation types in translation from English into Lithuanian.The aim of the paper is to explore word formation patterns and translation thereof from English into Lithuanian in texts of the institutional register.The objectives of the paper are: 1. to investigate the patterns of word formation in English and Lithuanian; 2. to analyze word formation patterns and their translation in institutional texts.
The methods applied in the research were the overview of scientific literature and descriptive analysis which encompasses quantitative and qualitative analyses.
Institutional texts differ from the other types of texts in terms of register and some underlying principles, i.e. complexity, accuracy, usage of terms, objectivity.As Biber (2006, p.50) points out, in terms of linguistic features, it is the most complex register.The same applies to technical translation."Technical translation is a type of translation.In this case, the word 'technical' refers to the content of the document, not to the tools used" (Schubert, 2010, p.350).Herman (1993) notes that technical translation is in a way similar to institutional translation.Due to the strict rules of the institutional register, translation "… should

Introduction
The notion of word plays the central role in understanding and investigating a language.Muehleisen (2010) points out the importance of word formation in the field of linguistics as a complex area dealing with the interface of semantic, syntactic and morphological-phonological features.Zapata (2007, p.4) and Fabregas&Scalise (2012, p.14) subdivide the main English word formation types into 1) compounding and 2) affixation (derivation) which can also be divided into suffixation and prefixation.According to Bauer (1983) and Greenbaum (1996), affixation and compounding are the most productive means of word formation in English.Szymanek (2005, p.431) argues that "… suffixation has been, and still is, the primary source of new complex words, in English and in many other languages." Nouns in English are mostly formed by employing other nouns and adjectives.The most common suffixes used in forming nouns from nouns are: -er, -ette, -hood, -ism, -let, -ling, -scape, -ship.According to Bauer (1983, p.22), the most productive suffix when forming a noun from a verb is the suffix -ation, whereas the suffix -ness is the most productive when coining nouns from adjectives."There are four suffixes which derive verbs from other categories (mostly adjectives and nouns), -ate, -en, -ify and -ize" (Plag, 2003, p.116).Due to the structure of English, verbs are not formed from other verbs by means of suffixes.
Adjectives with suffixes in English are formed from verbs, nouns and other adjectives.The suffixes -al, -esque, -less are frequently used when forming adjectives from nouns.When an adjective is formed using a verb as the base, the most frequent suffix is -able.As Bauer (1983, p.224) states, the suffix -ish is the most productive one when forming an adjective from another adjective.Plag (2003, p.123) distinguishes -ly, and -wise as the most common suffixes in adverb formation.The suffix -ly is very productive when forming adverbs using adjectives as the base, whereas the suffix -wise is used when adverbs are formed from nouns.Ginzburg et al, (1979, p.115), Plag (2003) provide different approaches to prefix classification.Bauer (1983) distinguishes two types of prefixes: class changing and class maintaining prefixes.The group of class changing prefixes is very narrow and contains the prefixes: a-, be-en-; de-, dis-, non-, un-.Other class modifying prefixes are very rare, or only occur in single cases.All of the aforementioned prefixes, applied to words of one lexical class, form derivatives of another lexical class.Most of the class maintaining prefixes are not as productive as the class changing prefixes.
Currently, researchers in all the areas of linguistics focus on the study of compounding.As suggested by Scalise and Vogel (2010), compounding is the manifestation of the tendency towards multiword constructions such as idioms, collocations and binomial constructions.Plag (2003, p.185) states that noun-noun compounds are the most common type of compounds in English.Verb-noun compounds, as Bauer puts it (1983, p.204), fall into two categories: 1) the noun as a direct object, 2) the noun as an indirect object.The second category is the most productive.Noun-verb compounds, according to Bauer (1983, p.205), do not appear to be productive, because of the problem of not knowing if the sec-

Word Formation Patterns in the Source Language
ond element is a noun or a verb.Verb-verb compounds are not productive at all either, because this type of compounding pattern is very rare.Adverb-noun compounds are formed with only adverbs of time and place.As for verb-particle compounds, "…it is arguable that these are not strictly compounds at all" (Bauer, 1983, p.206).Verb compounds are difficult to classify because "…the majority of compounds involving a verbal head is best analyzed as the result of a back-formation or conversion process" (Plag, 2003, p.198).
There is a marked contrast between English and Lithuanian word formation due to different language features.The complex Lithuanian inflection is one of the main differences between the two languages.The Lithuanian word formation involves the same types as the English word formation with the addition of paradigmization which is not present in the English language.Urbutis (2009, p.333) classifies the Lithuanian word formation into the following types: 1) suffixation, 2) prefixation, 3) paradigmization, 4) compounding.The aforementioned author (2009, p.37) describes word formation as the primary means of enriching vocabulary and coining new words from the existing ones by changing the morphological structure.According to Keinys (1999, p.15), words can be divided into primary and secondary.Not all the words undergo the word formation process as primary words are not formed from other words of the same language, but are inherited from a mother-tongue, borrowed from other languages or derive in some other way.Secondary words cannot exist without primary words.
According to Skardžius (1996, p.19), suffixation and compounding are the most productive types of word formation in Lithuanian.This is confirmed by Ambrazas et al. (1994).However, compounding plays a lesser role due to the smaller number of words combined in comparison with the number of suffixed derivatives.Furthermore, Smetona (2005, p.84) considers inflectional affixation to be the most significant type of word formation.Keinys (1999, p.23) defines two auxiliary ("supporting") Lithuanian word formation types: prefixation-suffixation and compounding-suffixation, both of which occur when a word is formed using more than one formant.Moreover, Urbutis (2009, p.342) mentions two more, rarely occurring, mixed types of word formation: prefixation-paradigmization and compounding-paradigmization.Paradigmization is the most common word formation process in the Lithuanian language.As Skardžius (1996, p.15) puts it, the ending of the word determines the role of the word in a sentence.The number of noun endings, as compared to the number of suffixes or prefixes, is very small with only 9 endings being used in noun formation: -as, -is/ -ys (-ios), -a/ -ia, -ė, -is (-ies), -ius, -uo).The paradigmization of adjectives and pronouns is even less frequent than the paradigmization of nouns.In contrast, the paradigmization of numerals is quite high due to the ordinal number derivatives taking gender endings (Keinys, 1999, p.84).
With regard to compounding, Paulauskienė (2004, p.125) points out that the stem of a compound is formed by using constituent parts of two separate words, the second member of which, according to Ambrazas et al. (1994, p.150), is more significant.Out of the number of inflectional parts of speech, only the verb is not compounded in Lithuanian.It should be noted that if the second member

Word Formation Patterns in the Target Language
of the compound is a verb, its properties as a verb diminish as it takes the properties of the first member.Urbutis (2009, p.260) states that word ending plays an important role in the formation of compounds and the formation of non-inflectional parts of speech using this method is very rare.Most of those words have blended together over time.As compared to the English language, there is a strict pattern of coining compounds in Lithuanian.The number of hyphened compounds is small and open compounds are non-existent.
The material analyzed was collected from the EUR-Lex database, the corpus of which contains valid and approved bilingual documents.550 examples of word formation were selected from 17 original documents (see appendix) omitting repetitive examples of SL and their counterparts in TL.Transformations were classified on the basis of word formation types in SL, TL and the types not conforming to the set patterns of word formation.The volume of the translated documents in the aforementioned database implies that the translation of texts was not influenced by a viewpoint and working habits of a single translator.
The descriptive analysis of English word formation patterns and the translation thereof into Lithuanian in the institutional register was carried out by employing quantitative and qualitative methods.As Rasinger (2010, p.52) points out, the quantitative method enables researchers to compare a relatively large number of structures, patterns, etc by using a comparatively easy index.

Methodology Results
In the texts selected for the analysis, 550 cases of transformations in word formation were identified.The most frequent cases of word transformation types were analyzed in the study.
In the classification, two sets of transformations in word formation were distinguished: maintaining and non-maintaining word formation transformations.The majority of the cases in the set in which word formation transformations are maintained constitute 72 % of the examples maintaining suffixes in TL (see Fig. 1).In this group, the derivatives formed by means of prefixation plus suffixation make up more than 23 % of total transformations.The percentage of other formation types is 3 % for compounding and 2 % for prefixation.
The data in Figure 2 illustrate the distribution of non-formation word formation transformations, with the percentage of suffixation cases slightly exceeding the percentage of compounding cases, 46 % and 43 %, respectively.The number of other cases of non-formation word formation transformations is insignificant:

Occurrences of Non-maintaining
Word Formation Transformations in TL.

Freguency of Occurrences of Word Formation
Types in SL ant TL. derivatives formed by means of prefixation comprised 9 % whereas the derivatives formed by means of prefixation plus suffixation account for just 2 %.
A clear distinction between the number of SL and TL formation types, as analyzed in the sample, can be seen in Figure 3.The vertical axis indicates the percentage of word formation types in both languages, whereas the horizontal axis lists the types of word formation.The occurrence of suffixation was found to be the largest word formation group in SL word formation comprising more than a half of all the examples (54 %).The number of prefixation cases in SL was lower.
The percentage of compounding occurrences is much lower in the transformation result in TL than in SL (3 % vs. 23 %).The sample did not provide many cases of prefixation in either of the languages (6 % in SL vs. 3 % in TL).In contrast, compounding in SL was significantly higher than in TL.As for transformations of prefixation plus suffixation, the percentage of this word formation type was comparable in both languages (17 % in SL vs. 21 % in TL).On the other hand, the cluster of this particular word formation type was found to be exclusive, i.e. the percentage of occurrence in TL exceeded that in SL.
Due to idiosyncrasies of the Lithuanian language structure, four more types of word formation were distinguished in TL: no formation, phrasing, prefixation plus paradigmization, and paradigmization.Phrasing accounts for the majority in these word formation types existing merely in TL.It is important that phrases A more detailed analysis of transformation types in translation will be provided further.
It is worthy of notice that there was a wide range of transformations where suffixation in SL was replaced with other means of word formation in TL.However, as the example below suggests, not all formation maintaining cases sustained their lexical form in TL.
[SL] … coding based on ISCED mappings to be delivered to Eurostat.
The example above shows no formation change in TL, but the transformation resulted in a different lexical unit by employing the suffix of past participle passive -t-and the inflection -as of the masculine gender in TL.
Suffix transformations when words maintain suffixes in TL but have also an attached prefix to it account for a substantial share of transformations.In the example below, prefixation was employed to retain clarity and avoid confusion, because verb abstracts have a continuous meaning in TL.
[SL] …the historical link between the exclusivity clause and national territorial limitations.
Another considerable group of suffix transformations encompasses the ones in which suffixation was omitted and transformed into a word incorporating a prefix and a paradigm, e.g.: [SL] … for organisations at risk of marginalisation, so as to prolong their training; [TL] … kurioms gresia atskirties pavojus, prieigą prie profesinio mokymo siekiant jį prailginti; Compounding as word formation in SL makes up the second largest cluster of transformations.Compound transformations into phrases with one or more of their constituents formed by means of suffixation is the dominant compounding transformation type.In the first example below, a simple compound transforms into a phrase into which another phrase is inserted between its constituents due to the differences in the sentence structure of SL and TL.
In the second example, both components of the English compound are formed by using suffixes, and the compound is translated into two separate suffixed units.
[SL] Submission of proposals and deadline… The following examples illustrate word formation transformations with prefixation and suffixation in both languages.In this transformation type, the lexical class may be retained or changed.In the first example below, the highlighted noun transforms into a noun whereas in the second example the noun transforms into an adverbial participle.
[SL] … covering mechanical reproduction rights… [TL] … apimančią mechaninio atkūrimo teisę… [SL] … via the internet, satellite and cable retransmission… [TL] … perduodant internetu, palydovais ir kabeliais… Due to the fact that the Lithuanian language has a broad inflection system, prefixation and suffixation formation in SL tend to transform into prefixation and paradigmization in TL as shown in the example below.
[SL] … the remuneration of their authors… [TL] … jų autorių atlygis… The following examples illustrate transformations of prefixation and suffixation in SL into compounding or phrases in TL.
[SL] The programme's specific objective is to strengthen cooperation be-tween… [TL] Programos konkretusis tikslas -stiprinti aukštojo mokslo įstaigų ben-dradarbiavimą… [SL] … to obtain a multi-territorial and multi-repertoire licence… [TL] … dėl įvairaus repertuaro ir daugelyje teritorijų galiojančios licencijos… Transformations into TL phrases containing more than one lexical unit were the most complex transformations.The complexity of all SL compound transformations was influenced by TL lexis having or not having an accurate equivalent.

Conclusions
The overview of theoretical material on word formation patterns in English and Lithuanian provided the base for a relevant classification of word formation transformations.The classification chosen incorporated the main English word formation types and their Lithuanian counterparts.The study of occurrence of word formation types in SL and TL in the sample showed that suffixation was the most frequent word formation type in SL comprising more than a half of all the examples (54 %).A detailed analysis of the main patterns in English word formation and their transformations in TL in institutional texts of the chosen sample revealed two sets of transformations in word formation: maintaining and non-maintaining word formation transformations.
The majority of the cases in which word formation was maintained accounted for 72 % of the examples maintaining suffixes in TL.
Actual word formation transformations (from one SL formation into a different TL formation) in the groups of SL suffixation and compounding outnumbered all the other word transformation types.
Examples of suffixation in SL reveal three major groups of transformations in TL: prefixation plus suffixation, prefixation plus paradigmization and cases of non-formation.Due to the idiosyncrasies of TL structure, four more types of word formation were distinguished in TL: non formation, phrasing, prefixation plus paradigmization, and paradigmization.
The comparison of selected examples revealed several trends of transformations when translating from English into Lithuanian: _ suffixation was maintained in TL, but the transformation resulted in a different lexical unit in TL; _ compound transformations were the most inconsistent and in most cases resulted in phrases.
_ All compound transformations were influenced by TL lexis having or not having an accurate equivalent in SL.

Fig. 1 .
Fig. 1.Occurrences Maintaining the Same Formation Type in TL.
be expressed in a variety of different formation combinations or no formation at all.The distribution of the other three types of word formation in TL is as follows: prefixation plus paradigmization constitute 9 %, non formation 6 %, and paradigmization 3 % of cases.

[
TL] Galutinė paraiškų pateikimo data ir tvarka… [SL] … and promote awareness-raising at national and pan-European level… [TL] … ir skatinti informuotumo didinimą nacionaliniu ir visos Europos lygiais… Another substantial group is made up of compounding transformations when a compound in SL transforms into a single suffixed unit in TL.For example: [SL] … the EU 2020 flagship initiative… [TL] … ES 2020" numatytą pavyzdinę iniciatyvą… As shown in the examples above, all compound transformations are influenced by TL lexis having or not having an accurate equivalent in SL.