Mapping business translation studies on metaphor. A bibliometric analysis

HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X Mapping business translation studies on metaphor. A bibliometric analysis español Investigación sobre la metáfora en traducción económica. Análisis bibliométrico DANIEL GALLEGO HERNÁNDEZ Universidad de Alicante. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Departamento de Traducción e Interpretación. Apdo. Correos, 99. 03080 Alicante, España. Dirección de correo electrónico: daniel[email protected] ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8081-882X ALBA LÓPEZ DÍEZ Universidad de Alicante. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Departamento de Traducción e Interpretación. Apdo. Correos, 99. 03080 Alicante, España. Dirección de correo electrónico: [email protected] ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0004-3854-1432 Recibido/Received: 24/1/2022. Aceptado/Accepted: 16/5/2022. Cómo citar / How to cite: Gallego Hernández, Daniel and Alba López Díez, «Mapping business translation studies on metaphor. A bibliometric analysis», Hermēneus. Revista de Traducción e Interpretación, 26 (2024): pp. 161-195. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24197/her.26.2024.161-195 Abstract: The aim of this paper is to map research on metaphor in business translation in Spain and examine whether it is ahead of or lagging behind such research in other countries. Following a bibliometric analysis, we compare publications on the topic by Spanish and international authors. There are three steps involved: (1) finding publications on metaphor in business translation, (2) compiling and managing those publications, and (3) studying their bibliographical references. We have analysed our corpus according to different bibliographic and content elements, such as format, language, year, country, keywords, author and university productivity, co-authorship networks, and bibliographic coupling. Results show similarities, such as centre and author productivity, the most cited works and authors, and research interests. Among the main differences found, Spanish authors have more co-authored publications and more publications on translation, while international authors study more language pairs, have written more books and PhD theses on the topic, and collaborate more with researchers from other universities. Keywords: Business translation; metaphor; research; bibliometrics. Resumen: El objetivo de este trabajo es cartografiar la investigación sobre la metáfora en traducción económica y conocer en qué plano se sitúa la investigación española con respecto a la internacional. Mediante un análisis bibliométrico se comparan las publicaciones españolas e internacionales sobre el tema. El proceso consta de tres pasos: (1) identificación de publicaciones sobre el tema, (2) recopilación y gestión de dichas publicaciones, y (3) estudio de referencias bibliográficas. Se analiza el corpus desde distintos ángulos: contenido, formato, lengua, año, país, 162 Daniel Gallego Hernández y Alba López Díez HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X palabras clave, productividad de autores y universidades, redes de coautoría y correferencias. Los resultados muestran similitudes, como en la productividad de centros y autores, obras y autores más citados e intereses investigadores. Entre las principales diferencias, mientras que los autores españoles tienen más publicaciones en coautoría y sobre traducción, entre los internacionales hay más pares de lenguas estudiadas, más libros y tesis doctorales. Además, colaboran más con investigadores de otras universidades. Palabras clave: Traducción económica; metáfora; investigación; bibliometría. Summary: Introduction; 1. Bibliometric approach; 2. Methodology: corpus and bibliometric indicators; 3. Results, 3.1. Form indicators, 3.2. Personal indicators, 3.3. Productivity indicators, 3.4. Collaboration indicators, 3.5. Impact indicators, 3.6. Content indicators; 4. Discussion; 5. Conclusion; Bibliographical references. Sumario: Introducción; 1. Aproximación bibliométrica; 2. Metodología: corpus e indicadores bibliométricos; 3. Resultados, 3.1. Indicadores de forma, 3.2. Indicadores personales, 3.3. Indicadores de productividad, 3.4. Indicadores de colaboración, 3.5. Indicadores de impacto, 3.6. indicadores de contenido; 4. Discusión; 5. Conclusión; Referencias bibliográficas. INTRODUCTION Business translation in the broad sense (including economics, finance, trade, etc.) is a burgeoning activity throughout the world. Market surveys, specialised courses in translation curricula, and scientific production, which is steadily gaining interest, are testimony to that. A recent study by Gallego (2020) has showcased the importance of business translation research over time. He identifies, inter alia, some of the main interests and research areas: the use of translated works of great thinkers to reconstruct economic history; analysis and description of economic and financial text genres for practical or training purposes; business translation training/learning; market research; information needs analysis and creation of dictionaries; and translation problems at the microtextual level: terminology, phraseology, metaphor, interference, etc. However, that attempt to map business translation research is limited to Spanish centres’ scientific production, and therefore only represents a limited part of real scientific production. The aim of this study is to make a small contribution to current international research on business translation, and studies of metaphor in that context. This paper document completes the abovementioned study with the scientific production of authors affiliated with international universities or centres, through a similar bibliometric analysis. This may help to answer some unanswered questions. Overall, the objective may be simplified as addressing the question: what are the differences and similarities between Spanish and international research on Mapping business translation studies on metaphor. A bibliometric analysis 163 HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X metaphors in business translation? Answering this question requires a parallel bibliometric analysis similar to Gallego’s (2020), which is hardly feasible here. The present study therefore focuses solely on one of the main areas of research on business translation: the translation of metaphors. Traditional theories considered metaphors to be merely decorative devices (Newmark, 1981; Pliego, 1993). However, Lakoff and Johnson (1980) and Lakoff and Turner (1989) laid the foundations of the Contemporary Theory of Metaphor, dismantling the traditional approach and labelling it false (Lakoff, 1993). This contemporary version asserts that metaphors are an integral part of our everyday life, and that our way of thinking and acting is metaphorical in nature (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980). It was in the 1980s that scholars first started to prove that business language has a strong metaphorical component (Henderson, 1982; McCloskey, 1983) and that metaphors are an essential tool for understanding specialised concepts. There has been an increase in works related to business metaphors since then, and there are areas of significant interest, such as English for Specific Purposes (Boers, 2000; Charteris- Black, 2000; Henderson, 2000) and Translation and Interpreting Studies. 1. BIBLIOMETRIC APPROACH Bibliometrics can be defined as “the application of mathematics and statistical methods to books and other media of communication” (Pritchard, 1963). One of the authors who helped build its foundations, Eugene Garfield, refers to it as “the quantification of bibliographic information for use in analysis” (Garfield et al., 1983, p. 581). According to De Bellis (2009, p. 3), bibliometrics is a kind of metascience which, based on bibliographic data (titles, authors, citations, etc.), analyses, quantifies and measures the scientific production of a given discipline, creating formal representations of behaviour for explanatory, evaluative or administrative purposes. Bibliometric analyses have been questioned on the grounds of researchers’ lack of scientific and statistical training, the absence of a preliminary approach or an insufficient theoretical framework. However, interpreting results with the right standardisation and considering their limitations can be really beneficial for assessing scientific research activity. To be of interest to bibliometrics, a discipline needs a great number of self-identifiable publications, as well as long-term continuity, for all 164 Daniel Gallego Hernández y Alba López Díez HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X information to be analysed. In that regard, translation and interpreting studies increased dramatically until achieving consolidation in the last two decades of the 20th century. Another requirement is the availability of bibliographic repositories encompassing everything that has been studied. In this respect, specialised databases on translation, such as TSB (Translation Studies Bibliography) (Gambier and van Doorslaer, 2004- 2022) and BITRA (Bibliography of Interpreting and Translation) (Franco, 2001-2022), help to ensure the relevance of Translation and Interpreting Studies to bibliometrics. Bibliometric analyses on translation are relatively scarce and new. According to Rovira et al. (2020, p. 27), BITRA records more than 100 publications on this topic. In essence, such studies use either BITRA or TSB for entries such as author, title, date of publication, keywords, among others, or manually retrieve a bibliographic corpus. Researchers use bibliometric indicators to identify typical or unusual patterns in scientific production. Such indicators vary greatly, including, but not limited to: year, format, language, author’s gender, citations, co-citations, coauthorship and keywords (Gile, 2015). Each indicator encapsulates one or more bibliographic characteristics by means of numeric data, whose interpretation can provide useful insights for research. For instance, Pöchhacker (1995) outlined a research overview of interpreting studies drawing on productivity, format and language indicators, among others. By quantifying work and author citations, Franco (2009) offered a descriptive and critical review of translation research, highlighting the most influential authors and theories. Li (2015) presented a scientometric analysis covering publication counting, citation, editorial board composition and word analysis from the publications of scholars from Mainland China. Zanettin et al. (2015) labelled fields or themes of study and research methodologies by extracting keywords and n-grams from abstracts. Rovira et al. (2020) discovered collaborative patterns in Translation and Interpreting Studies by exploiting co-authorship indicators, combined with format, year and citation indicators. 2. METHODOLOGY: CORPUS AND BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS Our bibliographic corpus contains publications that focus on metaphor analysis as part of studies on business translation (hereinafter, “translation studies”) and cross-linguistic comparative studies of economic discourse that examine similarities and differences, frequency, conceptual Mapping business translation studies on metaphor. A bibliometric analysis 165 HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X parallelism, etc. of metaphors in two or more languages (hereinafter, “comparative studies”). The corpus comprises 205 publications divided into two sub-corpora, one including publications by researchers with Spanish affiliations (hereinafter, “Spanish sub-corpus”) and the other by researchers with non- Spanish affiliations (hereinafter, “International sub-corpus”). All corpus references can be found at http://t.ly/RU0h. The Spanish sub-corpus contains 60 records corresponding to 42 authors. It includes the 46 works retrieved by Gallego (2020) and 14 new records, most of them published after 2016. It is important to clarify that not all the researchers in this sub-corpus are Spanish, but they are or have been affiliated with Spanish universities or centres. The International subcorpus contains 145 records corresponding to 108 authors. We compiled the corpus mainly with works from BITRA, but also from other databases such as WoS, Proquest and Google Scholar. Additionally, we retrieved new publications while recording the bibliographical references of works already included in the corpus. Finally, we contacted researchers by email to ask if they had other publications on business translation or comparative studies. We recorded publications in a spreadsheet and indexed them using BITRA’s keywords, as well as other metadata such as affiliation (in terms of the author’s university or centre), the author’s country and gender, language pair, etc. We manually retrieved and recorded abstracts and bibliographical references, an essential step in citation and co-citation analyses. After excluding references that were not academic works (dictionaries, news articles, etc.), we ended up with approximately 2,200 registers (1,500 excluding repetitions) in the Spanish sub-corpus and more than 6,000 (3,800 excluding repetitions) in the International sub-corpus. Our analysis encompasses six categories of bibliometric indicators: form, personal, productivity, collaboration, impact and content indicators (Ardanuy, 2012). In our study, form indicators include publication year, format (book, book chapter, article or PhD thesis) and language. Personal indicators focus on authors’ gender and country. Productivity indicators measure scientific production, i.e., the number of publications per author, university or centre, and country. These indicators use any quantifiable item on the basis of which productivity can be measured and ranked. Collaboration indicators identify works signed by two or more authors. Co-authorship networks help to determine which pairs, groups or centres 166 Daniel Gallego Hernández y Alba López Díez HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X have worked together. Impact or visibility indicators show the number of citations per work or author. These indicators are well known in bibliometrics due to their direct effect on researchers’ careers (Ardanuy, 2012, p. 17). On the one hand, our analysis compares the most cited Spanish and international works and authors. On the other hand, it examines instances where two authors refer to the same third author in their works (bibliographic coupling). Lastly, content indicators show the language pairs studied, BITRA’s keywords, the most frequent keywords in title publications, and the distribution between comparative and translation studies. In addition to the spreadsheet, through which we obtained numerical data for each indicator, we used two other tools for co-authorship network design and bibliographic coupling: Bibexcel, for creating the net or vec data files necessary for map visualisation, and Pajek, which creates networks from the files in question and helps to display data. 3. RESULTS 3.1. Form indicators The earliest publication in the corpus is by a Spanish author (Gómez, 1992). The earliest publication in the International sub-corpus is that of Boers and Demecheleer (1995). Overall, the most productive year is 2011, with four Spanish and sixteen international works. It is 2015 in the case of the Spanish sub-corpus and, again, 2011 in the case of the International sub-corpus (see figure 1). Figure 1. Publication year 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 International sub-corpus (145) Spanish sub-corpus (60) Mapping business translation studies on metaphor. A bibliometric analysis 167 HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X Articles are the preferred format, closely followed by book chapters (see figure 2). There are three PhD theses from Spain and twelve from the rest of the world. There are no books by Spanish authors and nine by international authors. Figure 2. Format English is the most used language in both sub-corpora (65%), followed by Spanish (16%) (see figure 3). English is the language of 73% of the publications in the International sub-corpus, but of just 47% in the Spanish sub-corpus. Spanish, meanwhile, is used in 43% of the publications in the Spanish sub-corpus, but in only 6% in the International sub-corpus. Regarding other languages, the Spanish sub-corpus has three publications in French, two in German and one in Galician. The International sub-corpus has seven works in French, four each in German, Russian and Slovak, three in Romanian, two each in Chinese, Italian and Serbian, and one each in Arabic, Korean and Indonesian. Figure 3. Language 9 9 72 30 102 12 3 15 52 27 79 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% International (145) Spanish (60) Total (205) Book Article PhD thesi s Book chapter 106 28 134 8 26 34 7 3 10 4 2 6 20 1 21 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% International (145) Spanish (60) Total (205) Engli sh Span i sh Fr ench Ger man Ot her 168 Daniel Gallego Hernández y Alba López Díez HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X As for accessibility, 29 of the 60 works (48%) in the Spanish subcorpus and 94 of the 145 (65%) in the International sub-corpus are available online. 3.2. Personal indicators The authors of the works in the corpus are 103 women (69%) and 47 men (31%) (see figure 4). The percentage of women is lower in the Spanish sub-corpus (64%) and slightly higher in the International sub-corpus (70%). The percentage of male authors in the Spanish sub-corpus and in the International sub-corpus is 36% and 30%, respectively. Figure 4. Authors’ gender Concerning countries, forty-two of the authors are from Spain. There are thirty-four countries represented in the International sub-corpus. Romania is in first position with thirteen authors, followed by China and the UK with ten authors each. Italy has eight authors, Germany seven, Russia six, Serbia five, and Taiwan four. Belgium, Denmark, Hong Kong, Iran, Lithuania and Poland have three authors each. Canada, Croatia, France, Palestine, Slovakia and South Korea have two authors each. The other countries, each of which has one author, are Argentina, Austria, Algeria, Hungary, Ireland, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Indonesia, Japan, New Zealand, Peru, Slovenia, Turkey and Vietnam. Europe tops the list of continents with 107 authors (67 excluding Spanish authors), followed by Asia with 36. The Americas have four authors, and Africa and Oceania one each. 76 27 103 32 15 47 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% International (108) Spanish (42) Total (150) Women M en Mapping business translation studies on metaphor. A bibliometric analysis 169 HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X 3.3. Productivity indicators Regarding the most productive countries (see figure 5), Spain has sixty publications; Romania is in second place with thirty-four and Italy third with eighteen. They are followed by the UK with fourteen publications, Serbia with nine, Taiwan with eight, Russia and China with seven each, and Poland with five. Germany, Argentina, Denmark and Slovakia have four publications each. Belgium and Indonesia have three each. Canada, Croatia, France, Hong Kong, Lithuania and Palestine have two each. Every other country has one publication. Figure 5. Most productive countries The authors come from ninety-seven different universities or centres, nineteen of which correspond to the Spanish sub-corpus and seventy-eight to the International sub-corpus. There are twenty-one universities with more than three publications (see figure 6). Regardless of the smaller number of Spanish universities, university productivity is similar in both sub-corpora. The Universities of Alba Iulia, Valladolid and Vigo all have more than nine publications. The most productive universities in the Spanish sub-corpus are the University of Valladolid with ten publications, the University of Vigo with nine, and the University of Murcia and the Complutense University of Madrid with eight each. The University of Alicante has five publications and the University of the Balearic Islands, four. Finally, the Autonomous University of Madrid, Pablo de Olavide University and the University of Extremadura have three publications each. The most productive universities in the International sub-corpus are the University of Alba Iulia with fourteen publications, the University of 5 7 7 8 9 14 18 34 60 010 20 30 40 50 60 Pol and ( 2%) China (3%) Russi a (3%) Tai wan (4%) Ser bi a ( 4%) United Kingdom (7%) I taly ( 9%) Romani a (17%) Spain (29%) 176 Daniel Gallego Hernández y Alba López Díez HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X Goatly, A. 1997 The language of metaphors 19 17 2 Schäffner, C. 2004 Metaphor and translation: Some implications of a cognitive approach 19 17 2 Dobrzynska, T. 1995 Translating metaphor: Problems of meaning 17 3 14 Kövecses, Z. 2010 Metaphor. A practical introduction 17 8 9 Toury, G. 1995 Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond 16 9 7 Henderson, W. 2000 Metaphor, economics and ESP: Some comments 15 13 2 Snell-Hornby, M. 1988 Translation Studies. An integrated Approach 14 5 9 Serón, I. 2005 La traducción de la metáfora en los textos financieros: estudio de caso 13 3 10 Boers, F. & Demecheleer, M. 1997 A few metaphorical models in (Western) economic discourse 13 5 8 White, M. 2004 Turbulence and turmoil in the market or the language of a financial crisis 11 2 9 Table 1. Works with more than ten citations As for the most cited authors (see figure 10), there are many similarities with the above-mentioned data. The authors with more than a hundred citations are, in descending order, George Lakoff, Mark Johnson, Jonathan Charteris-Black, and Zoltan Kövecses. In the Spanish subcorpus, George Lakoff, Jonathan Charteris-Black, Mark Johnson and Michael White have more than forty citations. In the International subcorpus, the same applies to George Lakoff, Mark Johnson, Zoltan Kövecses, Jonathan Charteris-Black, Alice Deignan, Teodora Popescu and Christina Schäffner. Of the twenty-seven most cited authors in the corpus, only nine do not appear in Table 1. Four of them are Spanish: Eva Samaniego, María Teresa Cabré, Pedro Antonio Fuertes Olivera and Gloria Corpas. The rest are international authors: Teodora Popescu, Lynne Cameron, Mona Baker, Siaw-Fong Chung and Kathleen Ahrens. Additionally, about half of the twenty-seven authors have at least one Mapping business translation studies on metaphor. A bibliometric analysis 177 HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X publication in our bibliographic corpus, which means that, compared to the most cited publications, there is a more balanced distribution of theoretical studies of metaphor and translation studies. There are two authors who are cited in only one sub-corpus: Popescu (fifty-four citations in the International sub-corpus), and Corpas (eleven citations in the Spanish subcorpus). Figure 10. Authors with more than ten citations 10 3 10 16 2 11 24 6 26 29 24 27 36 25 27 40 54 33 39 21 39 65 80 75 96 196 11 3 14 10 6 21 15 4 26 11 16 24 21 14 25 24 13 23 23 46 38 34 28 64 52 89 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Corpas, G. (11) Ahrens, K. (13) Dobrzynska, T. (17) Snell-Hornby, M. (20) Chung, S. (22) Fuertes, P. (23) Cabré, M. (26) Baker, M. (28) Samaniego, E. (32) Goatly, A. (37) Turner, M. (45) McCloskey, D. (48) Ennis, T. (48) Cameron, L. (50) Musolff, A. (50) Stefanowitsch, A. (51) Schäffner, C. (53) Popescu, T. (54) Boers, F. (56) Newmark, P. (62) White, M. (67) H ender son, W . (77) Dei gnan, A. (99) Kövecses, Z. (108) Charteris-Black, J. (139) Johnson, M. (148) Lakoff, G. (285) International sub-corpus Spanish sub-corpus 178 Daniel Gallego Hernández y Alba López Díez HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X Bibliographic coupling examines instances where two authors refer to the same third author in their works. Significant frequency entails that publications belong to the same area of expertise, even if they are not coauthored works. The network below (see figure 11) shows publications that have at least ten references in common. It features 78 of the publications in the corpus, 50 from the International sub-corpus (represented by triangles) and 28 from the Spanish sub-corpus (represented by squares). There are 42 comparative studies (28 and 14 respectively) and 35 translation studies (21 and 14 respectively). Regarding the graph’s layout, there is a big group with three subdivisions that revolve around Muelas (2018), and five isolated connections. The top left subdivision of the main group is formed by works from the Spanish sub-corpus. It confirms the influence of Serón (2005) on Spanish authors. Nearly all the works in the biggest subdivision are from the International sub-corpus, with a few Spanish exceptions (Muelas, 2016, 2019; Velasco, 2009; Orts, 2020a, 2020b; and Arrese and Vara Migueal, 2016). The third subdivision, located at the bottom left, comprises works by Teodora Popescu. The graph, however, does not show the number of references that are common to two given publications. Dobrota’s PhD thesis (2006), revised book (2016) and English translation (2017) share just over 150 references. Muelas’s PhD thesis (2018) and article (2019) share 59 references. Luporini’s PhD thesis (2013) and book (2019) share 57 references. The rest of the pairs have less than 50 matches. Most connections are works by the same author, implying that they are consistent and often use similar references. For instance, of the 12 pairs with more than 30 references in common, only four comprise different researchers: Muelas (2018) and Chow (2010) with 43 matches, Luporini (2013) and Chow (2010) with 32, Meiriño (2013) and Serón (2005) with 31, and Luporini (2019) and Muelas (2018) with 30. The graph does hint at the works with most connections (the different centres of the graph). There are ten publications linked to at least ten other works. Seven of those publications are PhD theses or books and would thus be expected to share more references. Muelas (2018) shares at least ten references with 35 works, which explains why it is the centre of the three subdivisions. Chow (2010) has 29 connections, Luporini (2019) has nineteen, Luporini (2013) has eighteen, Rodríguez (2010) has fifteen, Popescu (2016) and Karnedi (2011) have thirteen, Meiriño (2013) has twelve, Serón (2005) has eleven, and Dobrota (2017) has ten. Mapping business translation studies on metaphor. A bibliometric analysis 179 HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X Every isolated connection feature works by the same author and its references differ from those of most of the publications in the corpus. This could be due to a difference in methodology, subject matter or language pair, among other aspects. In the Spanish sub-corpus, the connection corresponding to Herrera et al. focuses on metaphor translation in press headlines, and Corbacho’s connection compares Spanish and German metaphors. In the International sub-corpus, Ramacciotti’s connection features a strong theoretical methodology for metaphor translation, Nazzal’s addresses English-Arabic metaphor translation, and Musacchios’s compares original and translated Italian metaphors. Figure 11. Bibliographic coupling 3.6. Content indicators The most studied language pairs (see figure 12) are English with Spanish, Romanian, Chinese and Italian. The Spanish sub-corpus contains studies of Spanish with English (60%), French (10%) and German (8%). The remaining 22% of its publications either study three or more languages (including Arabic, Italian and Portuguese) or do not focus on any specific language. The International sub-corpus covers a great variety of combinations. English-Romanian takes first place with 35 works (24%). Other relevant combinations are English with Chinese (10%), Italian 180 Daniel Gallego Hernández y Alba López Díez HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X (10%), Russian (5%), German (5%), Serbian (5%), Arabic (4%) and Spanish (4%). However, there are 48 other combinations (33%): English is studied with Indonesian on three occasions, with Croatian, French and Lithuanian twice each, and with Danish, Japanese, Korean, Persian, Slovenian and Turkish in one publication each. Regarding non-English combinations, there are four works on German-Slovak. French is studied with German (twice), Danish, Dutch, Romanian, Spanish and Vietnamese. Spanish is studied with Italian and Romanian. There is a work on Italian- Danish and another on Russian-Vietnamese. The rest of the publications in the sub-corpus include three or more languages or do not focus on any specific language. Figure 12. Language pairs BITRA’s keywords are useful for browsing the database content (see figure 13). All the publications in the corpus are indexed using the keywords “Business”, “Technical”, “Genre”, “Problem” and “Metaphor”. The most used keyword in the corpus is “Journalism”, which appears in about 61% of the publications, rising to 81% in the Spanish sub-corpus and dropping to 53% in the International sub-corpus. “Corpus” and “Research” are the next most used keywords, with 37 instances (18% of the publications), reflecting great interest in studying business metaphors in the press, generally using a corpus-based approach. “Terminology”, “Phraseology”, “Dictionaries”, “Teaching” and “Interference” are fields of study with five to 12 occurrences (2% to 5% of the publications). There are some keywords that only appear in one sub-corpus, an example being the American economist “Paul Krugman”, whose work is studied in three publications in the Spanish sub-corpus. “Linguistics”, “Tourism”, 6 36 42 35 35 14 14 14 14 8 8 7 7 7 7 6 6 6 6 5 5 48 13 61 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% International (145) Spanish (60) Total (205) English-Spanish (42) English-Romanian (35) Engli sh-Chi nese (14) English-I tali an (14) Engli sh-Russi an (8) English-German (7) English-Serbian (7) Spanish-French (6) English-Arabic (6) Spanish-German (5) Other (61) Mapping business translation studies on metaphor. A bibliometric analysis 181 HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X “Abbreviations”, “Pragmatics”, “Paroemia” and “Grammar” are other keywords only present in the Spanish sub-corpus. In the International subcorpus, “European Union” is an interesting case, with seven instances. Other keywords that only appear in the International sub-corpus are “Ideology”, “Advertising”, “Rhetoric”, “Pun”, “Humour” and “Culture”. Figure 13. BITRA’s keywords The most frequent keywords in publication titles confirm some of the above ideas (see table 2). All keywords have been translated into English 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 4 2 2 7 4 8 13 13 77 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 2 4 5 5 4 24 24 49 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Culture (1) Gr ammar (1) Humour (1) Pun (1) Paroemia (1) Pragmati cs (1) Rhetor i c (1) Abbreviations (1) Tour i sm (1) Advertising (2) I deology (2) Linguisti cs (3) Author (3) Paul Krugman (3) I nter fer ence (5) Teachi ng (6) Documentation (6) Dictionaries (7) European Union (7) Phraseology (9) Terminology (12) Resear ch (37) Corpus (37) Journalism (126) International sub-corpus Spanish sub-corpus 182 Daniel Gallego Hernández y Alba López Díez HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X for consistency purposes. Regarding subject matter, many publications include words such as “metaphor”, “study”, “analysis”, “corpus” and “terminology”. The data reveal that “comparative” and “contrastive” studies are abundant, especially in the International sub-corpus. “Cognitive” studies and metaphors about the financial “crisis” are also common. In addition, it may be the case that international authors pay more attention to “conceptual” metaphors, and they include more specific words in their titles, for example, “euro”, “bank” and “money”. Moving on to study area, the keywords “economic”, “financial” and “business” evidence the variation in the terminology used to refer to the type of translation in question. As shown before, “news”, “press articles” and “reports” are fairly common. The Spanish authors have six works focused on press “headlines”. The international authors, meanwhile, have five and nine works on “European” and “global” studies respectively. With regard to language, only “Spanish”, “English” and “German” appear in the Spanish authors’ publication titles, although, as mentioned in relation to the form indicators, there are several studies that focus on the French language. Almost all the main language pairs studied in the International sub-corpus appear in the international authors’ publication titles. Cat. International sub-corpus Spanish sub-corpus Subject matter metaphors (71), metaphor (39), study (29), crisis (25), metaphorical (18), analysis (12), comparative (12), conceptual (12), corpus (11), contrastive (10), cognitive (8), terms (7), euro (6), terminology (6), bank (5), money (5), metaphoric (4) metaphor (21), study (17), metaphors (13), crisis (11), corpus (8), metaphorical (8), analysis (5), comparative (5), cognitive (4), terms (4) Study area economic (51), business (35), discourse (23), financial (19), press (14), economics (11), economy (9), global (9), linguistic (8), media (8), European (5), reports (5), texts (5), articles (4), news (4), reporting (4) business (18), economic (15), press (11), financial (10), texts (8), headlines (6), economy (5), economics (4), reports (4) Language English (52), Romanian (20), British (11), Italian (9), German (8), Serbian (8), Chinese (7), Spanish (6), American (5), Arabic (5), French (5), Russian (4) Spanish (20), English (12), German (5) Translation translation (45), translating (15) translation (18), translating (5) Table 2. Most frequent keywords in publication titles Mapping business translation studies on metaphor. A bibliometric analysis 183 HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X As explained in the methodology, our corpus publications may be categorised as comparative or translation studies. Overall, both types are quite evenly distributed in the corpus, with 46% of publications being comparative studies and 48% translation studies (see figure 14). Nevertheless, comparative studies drop to 35% in the Spanish sub-corpus and reach 51% in the International sub-corpus. Consequently, translation studies make up 55% of the Spanish sub-corpus and 45% of the International sub-corpus. We have categorised the remaining publications as “Other”; they are theoretical studies that do not focus on a particular language or do not fall into either of the other two categories. Figure 14. Comparative and translation studies categorisation 4. DISCUSSION The results obtained from the impact indicators (see table 1; figure 10) roughly reflect the course of metaphor studies in the field of economic discourse, as summarized in the introduction. The corpus comprises 205 publications, 60 by authors affiliated with Spanish institutions and 145 by authors affiliated with institutions in the rest of the world. A total of 150 authors (42 from Spain and 108 international authors) have shown interest in the topic of business metaphor translation. They are predominantly female, and no significant differences have been detected in the gender distribution between Spanish and international authors (64% versus 70%, respectively). Both sub-corpora reflect a similar increasing interest in the topic since the last decades of the 20th century. The annual production has also been similar in the 21st century. Articles and book chapters are the most common formats in this area of research. They account for 88.3% of 74 21 95 66 33 99 5 6 11 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% International (145) Spanish (60) Total (205) Comparati ve studi es Tr ansl at i on st udi es Other 184 Daniel Gallego Hernández y Alba López Díez HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X research production. This contrasts with 15 PhD theses (three of them from Spain) and nine books (all by international authors), i.e., 7.3% and 4.4% of research outputs. There are no statistically significant differences in relation to, for instance, the percentages for these formats found in general translation studies in BITRA (January 2021). The language used most frequently to write the publications is English (65%). This percentage drops to 47% in the Spanish sub-corpus and rises to 73% in the International sub-corpus. The only English-speaking countries in this sub-corpus are Canada, New Zealand and the UK, which write 94% of their research in English. Excluding publications from these countries would give a percentage of English publications from non- English-speaking countries of 63%. In light of the research production data analysed, Spanish scholars have devoted more works to metaphor in business translation than scholars in any other country. This could be attributed primarily to the size of their respective research communities in this field, which is also crucially related to the availability of bachelor’s degrees (especially in Spain) and master’s degrees in Translation including economic translation in the curricula. As for the breakdown of research centres, the University of Alba Iulia, with fourteen publications, is the most productive. The reason for this may be the research project “Universals and variants of English and Romanian business metaphors. A corpus-based conceptual mapping of contemporary journalese”, funded by the Romanian Executive Agency for Higher Education, Research, Development and Innovation Funding (UEFISCDI) from 2015 to 2017. The project’s objectives, methodology and expected results are described in Popescu (2015), who is the most active author in the corpus and also the project’s principal investigator. The University of Valladolid is the second most productive centre, with ten publications, headed by the collaborative works of Fuertes and his colleagues, with a strong focus on terminographic approaches. The University of Vigo, with nine publications, is third in the list, a status attributable, on the one hand, to the works of Fernández and Galanes on an inter-university terminographic project chiefly aimed at studying images of the 2007 financial crisis in various languages; and, on the other hand, to the personal interest of Meiriño. The University of Murcia, due to the works of Rojo and (in particular) Orts, and the Complutense University of Madrid, mainly due to the collaborative works Herrera and White published between 2005 and 2008 on press headlines, have eight publications each. Mapping business translation studies on metaphor. A bibliometric analysis 185 HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X The University of Belgrade is the second most productive university in the International sub-corpus. It has eight publications, all of them by Silaški (four in collaboration with Đurović and two with Kilyeni). Based on the above data, it is possible to claim that greater collaboration leads to higher productivity. That could be corroborated by looking at the most productive authors. Furthermore, compared to the general data provided by Rovira et al. (2020, pp. 165-166) on coauthorship practices in Translation and Interpreting Studies, the collaboration rate for the publications in our corpus (31%) is higher than that of BITRA’s overall data (16%) and that of studies published between 2011 and 2015 (25.1%) according the same source. The differences involved are statistically significant, and it therefore seems possible to state that the study of metaphors, especially in relation to terminography, is conducive to cooperation. Nonetheless, such collaboration appears to be of the intra-university kind (67%). The impact of Lakoff and Johnson (1980), Henderson (1982) and Lakoff (1993) is reflective of metaphors being conceived of from a cognitivist perspective. Such a conception seems to have generated a wellestablished research methodology, whereby researchers take a corpusbased approach to the study of metaphors; this can be seen in the impact of works such as Charteris-Black (2004), Deignan (2005) or Stefanowitsch and Gries (2006). Using parallel or comparable corpora, researchers identify linguistic metaphors and classify them according to conceptual maps. In addition to this group of corpus-based studies with a clear descriptivist approach, there is a small number of works that are perhaps closer to prescriptivism. They usually indicate how translators may deal with metaphors depending on various practical aspects, and do not have the same bibliographical references as the other translation studies. A good example can be found in Ramacciotti’s works, whose references depart from most common bibliographical trends (see figure 11). Other publications related to prescriptivism only share one or two references with the rest of the works (and are hence not shown in the figure), which, again, suggests that they could actually be placed in a separate group. Regarding the language pairs studied, English-Spanish is the most common, with forty-two publications (thirty-six in the Spanish subcorpus), closely followed by English-Romanian with thirty-five, a combination that has been studied by researchers from both British and Romanian universities. Given the linguistic plurality of the international 192 Daniel Gallego Hernández y Alba López Díez HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X Lakoff, George (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought (pp. 202-251). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173865.013 Li, Xiangdong (2015). International visibility of Mainland China Translation Studies Community: A scientometric study. Perspectives, 23 (2), 183-204. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2015.1006645 Luporini, Antonella (2013). Metaphor in Times of Crisis: Metaphorical representations of the Global Crisis in The Financial Times and Il Sole 24 Ore 2008 [Unpublished PhD thesis]. Università di Pisa. Luporini, Antonella (2019). Metaphor in Times of Economic Change. From Global Crisis to Cryptocurrency: A Corpus-Assisted Study. Aracne. McCloskey, Deirdre (1983). The rhetoric of economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 21 (2), 481-517. McCloskey, Deirdre (1985). The Rhetoric of Economics. The University of Wisconsin Press. Meiriño Gómez, Jesús (2013). Traducción económico-comercial: el lenguaje metafórico en la prensa especializada. Comares. Muelas Gil, María (2016). A cross-linguistic study of conceptual metaphors in financial discourse. In Jesús Romero-Trillo (Ed.), Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics. Global Implications for Society and Education in the Networked Age (pp. 107-126). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41733-2_6 Muelas Gil, María (2018). Metaphor, Economy and Persuasion: A Socio- Cognitive Approach to Metaphor in Times of Elections [Unpublished PhD thesis]. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. Muelas Gil, María (2019). Ideology, metaphor and persuasion in times of elections: a corpus-based study of British and Spanish economic reports. Complutense Journal of English Studies, 27, 223-246. https:// doi.org/10.5209/cjes.63865 Newmark, Peter (1981). Approaches to Translation. Pergamon Press. Mapping business translation studies on metaphor. A bibliometric analysis 193 HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X Newmark, Peter (1988). A Textbook of Translation. Prentice-Hall International. Nguyen, Thi Hong Nhung (2020). Translation Peculiarities of Economic Metaphors from Vietnamese into Russian. In Dena Karim-Sultanovich Bataev (Ed.), International Scientific Conference «Social and Cultural Transformations in the Context of Modern Globalism» (pp. 799-806). European Publisher. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2020.10.05.107 Orts Llopis, María Ángeles (2020a). Emotion to forecast a recession: a bilingual lexical and sentiment analysis of the UN and IMF world economy reports for 2019. Ibérica, 40, 217-244. Orts Llopis, María Ángeles (2020b). Un estudio traductológico del sentimiento en los informes financieros español/inglés: las emociones en la economía desde la perspectiva del Análisis del Sentimiento y la Teoría de la Valoración. Sendebar, 31, 395-417. https://doi.org/ 10.30827/sendebar.v31i0.11817 Pliego, Isidro (1993). La traducción de la metáfora. Essays on Translation, 1, 97-103. Pöchhacker, Franz (1995). Writings and research on interpreting: A bibliographic analysis. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 6, 17-31. Popescu, Teodora (2015). Business metaphors explained. In Popescu, Teodora and Grigore-Dan Iordachescu (Eds.), Universals and variants of English and Romanian Business Metaphors. A Corpus-Based Conceptual Mapping of Contemporary Journalese from a Pedagogical Approach (pp. 13-21). Editura Didactică și Pedagogică. https://doi.org/ 10.29302/jolie.2016.9.1.7 Popescu, Teodora (2016). Conceptualisation of companies in English and Romanian business journalese. Journal of Linguistic and Intercultural Education, 9 (1), 95-113. Pragglejaz Group (2007). MIP: a method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22 (1), 1-39. https:// doi.org/10.1080/10926480709336752 194 Daniel Gallego Hernández y Alba López Díez HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X Pritchard, Alan (1963). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics. Journal of Documentation, 25 (4), 348-349. Richards, Ivor (1936). The Philosophy of Rhetoric. Oxford University Press. Rodríguez Márquez, María de Montserrat (2010). Patterns of Translation of Metaphor in Annual Reports in American English and Mexican Spanish [Unpublished PhD thesis]. University of Surrey. Rovira, Sara, Franco, Javier and Christian Olalla (2020). A bibliometric study of co-authorship in Translation Studies. Onomázein, 47, 158-194. https://doi.org/10.7764/onomazein.47.09 Schäffner, Christina (2004). Metaphor and translation: some implications of a cognitive approach. Journal of Pragmatics, 36 (7), 1253-1269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2003.10.012 Serón, Inmaculada (2005). La traducción de la metáfora en los textos financieros: estudio de caso. In María Torres and Marie-Ange Bugnot (Eds.), Traducción y Cultura. El referente cultural en la comunicación especializada (pp. 205-249). ENCASA. Silaški, Nadežda and Kilyeni, Annamaria (2011). THE MONEY IS A LIQUID metaphor in economic terminology – a contrastive analysis of English, Serbian and Romanian*. Professional Communication and Translation Studies, 4, 63-72. https://doi.org/10.59168/DWYH9440 Silaški, Nadežda, and Kilyeni, Annamaria (2012). The global financial crisis and metaphors – a contrastive analysis of English, Serbian and Romanian. Nasleđe, 21, 17-36. Snell-Hornby, Mary (1988). Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.38 Stefanowitsch, Anatol and Gries, Stephan Th. (2006). Corpus-based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy. De Gruyter. Toury, Gideon (1995). Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.4 Mapping business translation studies on metaphor. A bibliometric analysis 195 HERMĒNEUS, 26 (2024): págs. 161-195 ISSN: 2530-609X Velasco Sacristán, Marisol (2009). A translation approach to metaphor teaching in the LSP classroom: sample exercises from a Business English syllabus. Ibérica, 17, 83-98. White, Michael (2003). Metaphor and economics: the case of growth. English for Specific Purposes, 22 (2), 131-151. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/S0889-4906(02)00006-6 White, Michael (2004). Turbulence and turmoil in the market or the language of a financial crisis. Ibérica, 7, 71-86. Zanettin, Federico, Saldanha, Gabriela and Harding, Sue-Ann (2015). Sketching landscapes in Translation Studies: A bibliographic study. Perspectives, 23 (2), 161-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.20 15.1010551