Mark Inferential Relations

An inference can be paraphrased as: “from state of affairs X I conclude the following: Y” (Buysse 2012: 1768). It has been well established that both so and dus are considered the prototypical markers of inference in their respective languages (see Sect. 1). For example, in (9) the speaker/author deduces from the state of someone’s fingernails in the first segment that this person cannot hold an occupation on the land or in a factory in the second segment. The difference with a ‘resultative’ relation is clear: the fact that someone is not working on the land or in a factory is not caused by their long fingernails.

(9) Fingernails rather long, so you’re not on the land or in a factory.

Vrij lange nagels, dus u werkt niet op het land of in een fabriek.

[‘..., dus you don’t work on the land or in a factory.’]

(Fiction, wat-002589, English-Dutch)

Dus has the ability to occur in a particular context that is alien to so, by stating an inferential conclusion that is presented as obvious in that the reader/interlocutor is expected to rely on shared background knowledge to retrieve the grounds on which the conclusion is based. Evers-Vermeul (2010) refers to this function of dus as that of an “accessibility marker” (2010: 171), labelling the stated conclusion as accessible to the hearer/reader regardless of its occurrence in the discourse. For example, in (10) dus is meant to have the recipient of the message infer from what they know of the Iraq situation (after the invasion by the so-called coalition of the willing) that the conditions for a successful British approach were never met. Interestingly, the marker was added by the translator in this case.

(10) While the Americans were unleashing mayhem to the north, the British were methodically applying Lugard-style colonialism in Basra. They formed alliances with sheikhs, bribed warlords and won hearts and minds by going unarmoured. There was optimism in the air. British policy demanded one thing, momentum towards local sovereignty and early withdrawal. There was no such momentum.

Terwijl de Amerikanen herrie schopten in het noorden, pasten de Britten in Basra heel methodisch oude koloniale principes toe: ze gingen allianties aan met plaatselijke sjeiks, kochten krijgsheren om en wonnen de sympathie van de bevolking door zich in ongepantserde voertuigen op straat te begeven. De Britse aanpak vereiste maar een ding: dat er werk gemaakt werd van Iraakse soevereiniteit en van een vroege terugtrekking der troepen. Maar dat is erdusnooit van gekomen. [‘But that dus never happened.’]

(Journalistic texts, sta-002559, English-Dutch)

In (11) this inferential prompt is even more outspoken. The excerpt has been taken from a statement by the Dutch Prime Minister, responding to the murder of a controversial politician earlier that day. Halfway through the statement he points out that it reflects his personal sentiments (rather than his Cabinet’s). Dus presents this statement as obvious because it can be inferred from, for example, the tone the speaker has used so far or from the situation in which the statement is being delivered. ^[1]

Table 3 Top three of correspondents of ‘inferential’ so and dus in translations and backtranslations

in absolute numbers (N) and adjusted percentages (excluding tokens with zero correspondent)

The inferential category accounts for 15.7% (N = 51) of source text tokens of so, and 12.6% (N = 47) of its backtranslations. These ratios are considerably higher for dus, with 27.1% (N = 243) of its source text tokens indexing an inferential relation as well as 28.5% (N = 95) of its backtranslations. As Table 3 shows, dus is almost the exclusive correspondent for so, both for its translations into Dutch and for its backtranslations. A similar situation holds for the backtranslations of dus, but not for the inferential tokens of dus that are translated into English, where so changes places with therefore. Interestingly, 23.9% (N = 58) of inferential tokens of dus are not translated into English at all, and 33.7% (N = 32) of its backtranslations were added by the translator as there is no corresponding marker in the English source text. This is less the case for so with 17.7% (N = 9) of translations and 12.8% (N = 6) of backtranslations not having a correspondent.

• [1] Maar dat alles schiet natuurlijk door je kop op een moment, zoals nu, dat datnieuws tot je komt. Dat je er steeds meer van doordrongen bent van wat er inNederland is gebeurd. In Nederland, een verdraagzaam land, met natuurlijkpolitieke tegenstellingen, zoals in iedere democratie. Dat is democratie. Maarwel met respect voor elkaar, respect voor elkaars mening. Respect voorelkaars mening houdt natuurlijk ook in dat je elkaar daarop kunt bestrijden,maar met woorden, niet met kogels. Wat hier gebeurd is, is onbeschrijflijk. Dit zijndusmijn persoonlijke ontboezemingen. [‘These are dus my personalsentiments.’] Ik kan het niet anders zeggen. Ik ben er kapot van. But it all runs through your mind at a moment like this, when you hear newslike this. As it begins to sink in that this has happened in the Netherlands, atolerant country, with differences of political opinion, of course, like anydemocracy. That is the nature of democracy. But with respect for each other,respect for each other’s views. Respecting each other’s views means ofcourse that you can come into conflict with each other, but with words, notwith bullets. What has happened here is indescribable. These are mypersonal feelings. I cannot say it any other way. I am devastated.(Administrative texts, kok-001321, Dutch-English)