• THE MEASUREMENT OF AFFECTIVE CONTENT IN

TRANSLAnON AND INTERPRETATION:

AMERICAN ENGLISH AND FILIPINO

VIRGILIO M. ENRIQUEZ RICHARD W. BRISILIN

Department ofPsychology Culture Training Institute
University ofthe Philippines East-West Center
Honolulu, Hawaii

• People's feelings and emotions, or more generally "affect," are at Ieast

partially determined by their cultural background. The concerns of a given
culture are expressed in a certain language. Difficulties arise when trying to
express these concerns in another language since the latter language was probably
not developed to express the same cultural concerns. If a technique to measure
affect can be developed for the special situation of translation between languages,
.the following may result: (a)· more precise indications of exactly what aspects
of affect can and cannot be communicated as part of translation between
languages; (b) a greater understanding of a broader area, the relationship between
culture and language. A study was designed to investigate the translation of
affect between American English and Filipino, the national language of the
Phllippines. Thirty-two raters read and then indicated their feelings about four
types of materials: humurous, violent, factual, and passages depicting positive
affect in interpersonal relationships. As depicted, humorous passages were rated
more so in English. Predictions were based on values commonly held by people

• in the two countries. Passages depicting positive interpersonal relationships were

rated more "serisitIve" in English than in Filipino, ;>ossibly because of the
availability of models in the English ·language. Passages explaining complex
factual material were preferred in English, ·possibly because that is the language
in which the material is commonly presented. Discussion.centers on application
of the results to the training of translators/intrepreters and to the study of the
relation between .eulture, language, and behavior.

People who survey the literature on trans-
lation between languages and conference in-
terpretation are almost invariably struck by the
small amount of empirical research compared
to other fields within the broad range of the
behavioral/social sciences (e.g., Gerver, 1976.)
One reason for. the lack of an extensive body
of research evidence on the nature of transla-
tion and interpretation is that the field "falls
between the cracks" of a number of disciplines.
Psychologists and sociologists have not studied
the field extensively because there is so much
of the language sciences involved. But .large
numbers of. linguists (the major exception of
Nida, 1964 and 1976, must be mentioned) have
.. not become immersed in the field, perhaps '
because there are so many extra-linguistic as-
pects involved, such as interpersonal relations
in conference interpretation (Anderson, 1976).
ss
When a field is not seen as part of a discipline,
it is necessarily viewed as an independent en-
tity that is apart from the mainstream of
research activity.
Additionally, those university-based scho-
lars who do enter the field usually admit that
they are doing so despite problems of which
they are quite aware. They realize that transla-
tion/interpretation is not a field that young
scholars choose as an effective route toward
tenure and promotion. Scholars in commercial
research organizations ("think tanks") are in a
similar position. Funding agencies, or depart-
ments within the super-grant foundations, do
not recognize translation/interpretation as part
of their "mission." Within the larger founda-
tions, translation/interpretation is very often
viewed as part of someone else's department.
 ..
". . •. /0 __ , '•..' . (: I: - ;,,' ','" ; ' . ' ", '~,> ,("..
'J.I • ~ •• l" . _, It

56 VIRGILIO G. ENRIQUEZ AND RICHARD W. BRISLIN

Bclause of this situation, scholars understand- that take place during simultaneous mterpre-
ably apply their talents in areas for which tation. He has also· been able to enrich the an
funding is more available. Sinaiko and Brislin study of basic thought processes, the area from 3U
(I973) discovered the department-within-mas- which he first borrowed. As part of his analy- co
sive-organization phenomenon while working sis of interpersonal relations between commu- w<
on the problem of translation materials from nicator and interpreter, Anderson (I976) has an
English to Vietnamese. The work was done profitably borrowed from the study of power ps
aspart of the United States government's policy (Simmel, 1964) in small groups. He has also ro
of winding down American involvement in the added to the broader study of interpersonal re- ml
Vietnam conflict. However, jt was discovered lations in social settings. Finally, Etelvia Atjona Ta
net there was no agency or office within the (I978) has demonstrated the interdependence ha
Department of Defense .whose responsibility of the field of translation/interpretation and co
clearly included translation, despite American the broader area known as "intercultural com- dif
presence in many parts of the world. Finally, munication," especially as applied to the train-
a special task force was created to deal with ing of interpreters.
m<
the translation needs for Vietnam.
vie
Researchers in the area of translation/ C~TRIBUTIONS FROM SOCIAL mE
interpretation are partly to blame for the PSYCHOLOGY AND PSYCHOMETRICS pre
relative independence of their field in its re- otl
If the above analysis is accurate, resear-
lation to the major disciplines such as psy-: lan
chers interested in translation should be much
chology, sociology, anthropology, and linguis- als
more explicit about:
tics. Researchers have not always linked their gee
wek on translation/interpretation to major (1) the potential contributions of var- :1 cul
j
'theories within the behavioral sciences, but ious disciplines with which they are Dil
instead have written for like-minded specialists; familiar, and I aff
If they had been more concerned with broader
. ,,
(2) the possible contribution ot their h~
theories, they would have been able to reach a 1
own research to the broader dis-
two audiences: specialists and members of a me
ciplines.
more general audience who are interested in sin
theoretical developments that cut across speci- Social psychology, :1 hybrid of psycholo- fol
fic fields. In addition, writing for the broader gy and sociology, is the broad area the major tio
audience might attract researchers from that concern of which is the study of human behav- CaIl
group so that more people might eventually ior in a social context, or more precisely, bet
work on translation issues. The reverse situation the study of an individual's behavior as a ing
is also true. Researchers in the specific field function of interaction with other people. cui
,P:we. not always profitably borrowed from Another broad area with much to offer
theoretical developments in the behavioral and is that of psychometrics, which is concerned
social sciences to the degree that they might. to
with the measurement of various aspects of dUl
Thus the field of translation/interpretation behavior. The goal in psychometrics is precise,
suffers since application of the theoretical the
reliable, and valid measures which luge num-
concepts could enrich the field. stai
bers of researchers and practitioners will accept
me:
. Perhaps the point about the transfer of as adequate representations of human behavior.
ideas between the field of translation and the An analogy may be helpful: all medical doctors
accept a reading from the level of mercury
• I
ME
broader behavioral and social sciences will be- I
tetf1e clearer if some exceptions to the general in a glass tube as an adequate representation
trend are noted. In borrowing ideas from cog- of a person's body temperature. Psychome-
nitive psychology, Gerver (1976) has been able tricians seek measures of human behavior that .pro
to describe the complexities of human thought are just as precise and as widely accepted. the
 THE MEASUREMENT OF AFFECTIVE CONTENf
The overlap between social psychology
and psychometrics is concerned with the mea-
surement of an individual's behavior in a social
context. Such fields as communication net-
works, formation of ingroups and outgroups,
and prejudice have received attention from
psychometricians. The technique that. was bor-
rowed for this research is concerned with the
measurement of meaning (Osgood, Suci, and
Tannenbaum, 1957). Such measurement may
have utility for the assessment of the affective
'j
content in translation, an issue that has been
difficult to investigate in the past.
The measurement of "meaning," and
more specifically "affect," has been the pur-
view of social psychologists skilled in psycho-
metrics since the "meaning" of anything is a
product of a person's lifetime interaction with
others. As will be reviewed in more detail
later in this paper, meaning and affect are
also determined by a person's cultural back-
ground, and the affective concerns of that
culture are expressed in a certain language.
)I Difficulties arise when trying to express. the
i affect in another language, which of course
I has long been an issue in translation. Thus if
i a technique which has been found useful in
!i measuring affect can be applied to the special
I situation of translation between languages, the
I following may result: (a) more precise indica-
! tions of exactly what aspects of affect can and
cannot be communicated as part of translation
between languages; (b) a greater understand-
I ing of a broader area, the relationship between
I culture and language.
'~ Psychometrics has already been applied
to the measurement of information conveyance
during translation. An introduction to some of
the specific techniques may be helfpul in under-
standing the more complex issue of affective
measurement.
I MEASUREMENT OF FACTUAL MATERIAL
CONVEYED IN TRANSLATION
Researchers who have worked on the
.problem of comparing (and/or determining
the equivalence 00 original and translated
57
material have recognized that different methods
are appropriate for different types of material
to be translated. To date, the most precise
measures have dealt with either (a) an overall
indicator of original-translation comparability,
or (b) a more specific indicator of factual con-
tent conveyed. No widely-used measure of
affective (as opposed to factual or infonnative)
content is available, although all students of
translation and interpretation are deeply con-
cerned with the affective or emotional aspects
of language. The major purpose of this paper
is to describe a measure of affective content in
translation. To put the measurement of affect
in perspective, however, a short review of other
types of measures may be useful. Although
the comments about the measures may seem
so critical as to cause a slight demoralization,
it is felt that all the measures have a valuable
role if wisely used. The fact that criticisms
can be listed indicates a certain maturity in
a field. The measurement of translation com-
parability has reached such maturity in the
last 10 years or so.
A listing of criticisms will help potential
users to decide which of several measures
might be used in a given situation. Further,
the criticisms listed below are no greater than
could be made about any measure or method
within the entire range of the behavioraf
social sciences.
Measures of overall translation cornpa-
rability include:
1. Measures of back-translation errors
(Werner and Campbell, 1970; Brislin, 1970;
Brislin, Lonner, and Thorndike, 1973; Twenty
and Hoemann, 1973). In this method, one
bilingual translates from .the source to the
target language, and a second bilingual (blindly)
translates from the target back to the source.
The two source language versions are then
compared. The justifiable fear that the two
source language versions may be artificailly
equivalent because (a) the back-translator is
skillful at making sense out of gibberish, or
(b) the target version is just a rewrite using
words and structure closer to the source than
 I ., ·11'.

S8 VIRGILIO G. ENRIQUEZ AND RICHARD W. BRISLIN

th'target language, can be handledby methods
detailed elsewhere (Brislin, 1972,' Brislin,
},.onner, and Thorndike, 1973). The resulting
measure, number of back-translation errors,
gives an overall indication of translation quality.
If the measure indicates multiple errors, how-
ever, this method does not allow insight into
the reasons for the errors, e.g., difficulty in
conveying information, affect, important struc-
tural features, and so forth.
• 2. The bilingual technique (Prince and
!dombour, 1967; Lazo, 1974). This approach
is most suited to formal tests; which of course
limits its general usefulness. A test is translated,
md bilinguals then take the test by responding
to some items in the source language and to
other items in the target language. Items that
receive a differential response dependent upon
language are held suspect. As with the back-
translation approach, the bilingual method does
'lot allow much insight into the reasons for a
po<Jtly translated item. Another problem, and
pe related to the issue of affective measure-
nent discussed below, is that some items
lerhaps should yield a different response de-
iendent upon langusge, A quite reasonable
iypothesis (Ervin-Tripp, 1964) is that bilinguals
nanifest slightly different personalities depen-
lent. upon the language they are speaking.
rhus the bilingual technique, in searching only
'or items that show equivalence across langua-
~es, may be masking an important and real
)henomenon of personality.differences across
anguages. To be sure, the hypothesis of per-
1n~ty differences as described here is not
,. well-established fmding that is widely accep-
ed by behavioral/social scientists. But the
iypothesis.represents an important possibility,
ind one that should be subjected to more
esearch.
Measures of the factual content con-"
reyed in comparisons of original and trans-
9~" materialinclude:
1. The knowledge test (Sinaiko and Bris-
in, 1973), in which people answer the same
et of questions after reading or hearing either
the original or translated version. If people can ~I,
I'
answer the same questions to the same degree \~
of accuracy, the versions are said to be "equi- \
valent" in terms of factual content conveyed. \; affect
vious
Two limitations of the technique are that (a)
it is directly applicable only to material which cusstc
lends itself to having its main points being not t
summarized in answers to a set of questions; sure I
and (b) it is dependent upon an acceptance of bles,}
some authority that such-and-such a set of nique:
questions and answers represents the factual tion c
linary
content that should be conveyed. The issue
lists
underlying point (b) will always be a concern
deepf
of translation measurement. Since measure- impos
ment demands a criterion, someone has to set of ora
a criterion in the form of what information
is to be conveyed, what response is desired
from consumers of the translation, and so humei
ti~ VI
forth. In translation and interpretation, the
criterion is set by the creator of the original object
language version, whether it be a verbal utter- scient
ance, gesture, Written product, or a combina- ly m
tion. Thetranslator/interpreter sometimes has to feelinl
discover the criterion (since it is not always belittl
explicit) and then convey it in another lan- shoM
guage. This (
2. The performance test (Sinaiko and (inclu:
Brislin, 1973), itt which people carry out a ~ask ists hl
after reading either a source or a target lan- hamPE
guage version. Ability to complete the task has D<
taken
successfully regardless of version is indicative
empiri
of translation equivalence. This is a power-
much
ful measure of information conveyance, with
its disadvantages being (a) expense and (Tl» its aspect
applicability beinglimited to material that is
concerned with a task of some sort. This type years
of criterion is easily conveyed to laypersons human
since there can be little argument that a trans- not pr
lation is adequate with respect to information tion, i
conveyance if readers can successfully perfonn are ap
a complex task (e.g. helicopter maintenance variabl
in the Sinaiko-Brislin study). Its limited use- the in
fulness in actual measurement does not detract and n
from its value as an example of what measure- has hi
ment can achieve. Other researchers canborrow colleag
aspects of the performance test, suchas precise- suring
ness and clarity of objectives, in designing Their
new measures for other types of translation. TheM
 11\ 't·' ,'.',j""
THE MEASUREMENT OF AFFECTIVE CONTENT
• THE MEASUREMENT OF AFFECf
Many types of translation convey feelings.
affect. and emotion; literature is the most ob-
vious example. although almost all oral dis-
cussion also involves these variables. There is
not the range of techniques available to mea-
sure feelings. affect. emotion and similar varia-
I blest however. in contrast to the variety of tech-
i Diques currently available to measure informa-
• on conveyance. Indeed. potential inter-discip-
linary collaboration between behavioral scien-
lists and humanists has been hampered by
deeply-held feelings about the possibility or
impossibility of measuring the affective content
of oral and written materials.
Many specialists in literature and the
humanities shun any attempt to measure affec-
tive variables. pointing out its impossibility and
objecting to the basicclaim made by behavioral
scientists that affective qualities can be precise-
ly measured. Perhaps one reason for their
ttelings is the belief that such measurement
.~ belittles or trivializes the creative achievement
shown by the author of a piece of literature.
This difference of opinion between empiricists
(including measurement specialists) and human-
ists has long been a stumbling block that has
hampered cross-fertilization. As a result. there
has not been very much collaboration that has
taken advantage of the different skills held by
empiricists and humanists and thus not very
much progress in understanding the affective
aspects of translation.
• A major attempt has been made in recent
)\ years at measuring the affective qualities of
human communication. While the advances have
not previously been applied directly to transla-
tion. it is felt that the techniques developed
are applicable to the ineasurement of affective
variables in translation. those that go beyond
the information that .are found in literature
and .most-oral communication. The advance
has been made by Charles Osgood and his
)cetleagues who have been interested in mea-
suring the connotations of words and concepts.
Their most influential publication was entitled
The Measurement of Meaning (1957). Arecent
59
summary statement of the approach is available
(Osgood. 1971). Certainly connotation and
meaning are central to literature. hence its
potential applicability to the measurement of
translation as presented in the next section of
this paper. After painstaking analysis. Osgood
concluded that the connotation of words can
be analyzed and summarized according to three
dimensions. Each of these dimensions can be
measured by a series of seven-point scales.
The three dimensions are evaluation. potency.
and activity. and examples of scales for mea-
suring each are as follows:
Evaluation
good bad
unfavorable favorable
like dislike
Potency
strong weak
soft hard
little big
Activity
fast slow
noisy quiet
dead alive
In actual application of the measurement
technique. called the "semantic differential,"
people would be asked to think of a concept.
such as beauty. and to rate it on the scaJles.
On the strong-weak scale. for instance. they
would check at place (a) if they felt that it was
a strong concept. place (b) if very strong. place
(c) if weak. and so forth.
strong (b) (a) (c) weak
Although the task of rating concepts according
to these scales may seem bizarre. Osgood (and
many other researchers: see Snider and Osgood.
1969. for a large collection of studies) have
found that people are quite good at indicating
connotation in this way. They may perhaps
find the task. a bit strange at first. but they are
quite willing to engage in this form of meta-
phorical thinking after only a few minutes of
 .: t ' '. "".)' ,.J;/ \ . I' l. r" .' :' I,.
--- _.- -- - \)

50 VIRGILIO G. ENRIQUEZ AND RIOIARD W. BRISLIN

J'

prltice. .Students in evaluation courses are They then would complete the scales according 3. (
often told that the semantic differential is a to how they feel about the passage that they t, best
useful, and easily administered technique during have read. The scales would be either lin the dim

~~~l
the second time it is presented to respondents. original language or in the language to which
On the first occasion, the administrator has to the material is translated. The technique could
be quite patient while respondents become ac- be used to pinpoint difficulties during the :11'
mor
som~
customed to the task of thinking about con- development of a translation through the com- 0\,

cepts and then rating the concepts on these parison of individual scales. It would be very pare
types of scales.
• An especially impressive body of research
helpful, for instance, if it were known that
there were problems with the ratings of warm- I I
I
4.
num
(Osgood, 1965; Osgood, May, and Miron, 1975) cold in comparing the original version ratings I
diff
has shown that people from many different with the translation ratings. The' translator ,I lang
countries (over 30 languages have been studied) could then give attention to the warm-cold thro
scattered allover the world use these three di- dimension in developing a subsequent version, stati
mensions when explaining the meaning of con- and then this revised version wouldbe subjected the
cepts. These dimensions have been posited as to additional testing. Ave!
cultural universals. Rating scales have been The reasoning behind the work to be nate
developed in over 30 languages so that the reported below is that almost all literature that
dimensions can be analyzed as they apply is written for people other than the author resp
I

to any concept. Some examples of English and alone, and translators also work so as to com- .1 targl
French scales for the evaluative dimension are: municate .to a large number of people. One
general criterion of translation quality is that asset
• English French
the sourceand target versions "produce ~ similar ion,
response" (Nida, 1964: 164) on the part of pher
likeable-repugnant sympathique-an ti-
readers. Such a response can be measured, and and
pathique so a determination of respondents' feelings to latio
happy-sad gai-triste
translated as compared to original language can
nice-awful gentil-mechant
versions should be of use both to translators , of t!
and to researchers interested in translation. ges f
These ,are not exact translation equivalents,
but, there is an "evaluative feeling tone" (a)
(Osgood, 1965: 102) that is common to the mE PRESENT STUDY: fami
English and· French scales, and it is the total THE MEASUREMENT OF AFFECTIVE whit,
feeling tone that would be used in the compa- CONTENT IN ENGLISH AND FILIPINO I (b)l
rison of meaning acrosscultures. were
In applying previous work by Osgood
• THE MEASUREMENT OF AFFECT
to the measurement of affect in translation,
the .following four points were hypothesized:
mati
(c) ,
IN TRANSLATION Fili~
1. Respondents can indicate their feelings pred
The general argument put forward here
about either original language or translated pas- cont
is that a measuring instrument similar to the
sages by marking specific points on rating Filip
semantic differential can be applied to com-
parisons of the affective content of source- scales.
(d) 1
and target language versions of oral or written 2. Responses will differ according to obvious bot",
material. Written material was investigated in content differences in the passages. Four types (Bris
'til study to be reported, so the following of material were chosen for this investigation:
discussion will deal with how respondents humorous, violent, factual, and passages depic-
would read an original language passage and ting positive affect in interpersonal relation- of b
how some would read the translated version. -ships (hereafter called "interpersonal.") thes
 , f ~:.
THE MEASUREMENT OF AFFECTIVE CONTENT
t). Given assurances of translators doing the
best of work which they are capable, affective
differences in original vs. target language ver-
sions of a passage will not be large. In other
words, a violent passage will not be rated "hu-
morous," but it may be consistently rated
somewhat less violent in one language as com-
pared to another.
4. If responses are gathered from a large
number of raters, the average ratings for the
!ifferent passages (in their original and source
language versions) can easily be determined
through basic statistical calculations. These
statistics will then give an indication of how
the passage is seen by a large number of people.
Averaging over a large number of raters elimi-
nates the idiosyncrasies of anyone person so
that the overall rating is more similar to the
response of a large audience (the eventual
target of most translations).
The study was designed to allow an
rssment of these basichypotheses. Jn addit-
ion, we were interested in some more complex
phenomena that are based on the languages
and cultures under study. We investigated trans-
lation between English (more precisely, Ameri-
can Eriglish) and Filipino, the national language
of the Philippines. We chose these two langua-
ges for four quite different reasons:
(a) They are from vastly different language
families; English is an Indo-European language
while FilipiIio is an Austronesian language.
(b) Large numbers of English-Filipino bilinguals
were available who could assist us by reading
.terial and making ratings.
(c) A good deal of research has been done on
Filipino social behavior to serve as a basis for
predicting possible responses to the social
content depicted in the passages which the
Filipinos read in this study.
(d) The present study represents a collaboration
between native speakers of American English
('risUn) and Filipino (Enriquez).
Continuing the numbering from the list
of basic predictions, the more complex hypo-
theses; and their rationale, are as follows. All
~ , I
61
predictions assume that competent translators
have put forth their best efforts.
5. Humorous passages would be rated as more
humorous in Filipino than in English versions.
This prediction is based upon the observations
that the Filipino people greatly value a sense
of humor and that they use humor a great deal
in their verbal play (Morales-Goulet, n.d.),
Double meanings are common in their verbal
play, perhaps more so than in the United
States. Enriquez (1976) has observed that
people often engage in a teasing sort of verbal
play with each other, and that there is a nega-
tive term ("pikon") applied! to the few who
cannot "take" being the occasional target of
such play.
6. Violent passages would be rated as more
violent when presented in English than when
presented in Filipino. This prediction is based.
upon the fact that violence is strongly discou-
raged in the Philippines (Jocano, 1969). Even
among children, parents frown upon fighting
back whereas in other societies (including the
USA) fighting back would be seen in the light
.of defending oneself against an enemy. The
.avoidance is related to the very positive value
placed on "pakikisama" or "smooth interper-
sonal relations," as documented by Guthrie
and Azores (l968). "Pakikisama" involves good
feelings and pleasant relations among people,
which, of course; is impossible with any sort of
violence. Critics of this view make the counter
claim that Filipinos have a predisposition to
violence, as shown by reports of political
assassinations and careless logging operations
in rain forests for economic gain at the expense
of indigenous villagers. But others would argue
that these are atypical examples that have
been sensationalized. In contrast, the American
system of interpersonal behavior seems to in-
clude violence as a common staple, the evidence
of which can be seen in books, movies, maga-
zines, television, and so forth. Loud, hostile
arguments in public are much more common
in the U.S.A. than in the Philippines, leading
to the prediction that language befitting such
interpersonal hostility is more easily available
 - --_.- -------- _. - . y.
i ,62 VIRGiLIO G; ENIUQUEi'·AND 'RldiAR'D VI;i: BRIS'LlN f'
~n .American . English.' ~ "related sociolinguistic '.easily" communicated 'lam<:>Dtfli: eulture'~ 'main- (, ~nl
;bselV3ti:n : ~=a~; 'am;g! married-couples -bersrBxanipl•• are the: illimller of> votabtda'iy in, I li
,o~~ose 'ho , PlDho-En 'sh. bilinguals, ~gu-items"relatedlto snow, h(jrseS'~carsplt1~'knnn H rea,
~e. ts at iome are eld more often in' English the' four cultures' mentioned-above. Vocabulaty 'I lam
. ~~'!?~~~~~~O ,~~~~_?,1?75)" . , .::: "':,:' includes ,nouns,aild,·verbs·'that: describe;'3\ltfon AIr :j
':7. Passages, depicting. i posi~iv~ affect in inter-
j : -associatedwith the"nouns (e.g.:,! IYihat;. ~~ .done I'i wei
;personal.. relations. would: be': rated. as:, .more with: II car; obligations tc)')dn).-;Bu( rthe 'de-ve- ~l Wh,
."sensitive.; to .·relations between people" in lopment of a language to maH:h:'aueultu~'s \!, Uni
Filipino than in English, In discussing "pakiki- .concernsleads to.a.situation.in which translation Ii elec
.ama~' above, the.very.positive value.placed.on out- oLJhat language' is difficult. .It ·js;·Uk~ rat! J
: pleasant interpersonal, relations, was noted. .that.most potential target languages.do n9t,haye i COli
.Fllipinos -state.. for instance, that they must the same' development (to: conunJ.1Diqat~,!tJlte :'\ inst
have, good, :relations:with their co-workers: if . same concerns) as. the source langwtge.I,,1!1iusi it ; ,
.they .expect to accomplishanything in their ,will be difficult{not necessarily itnpossible)rto I tWI
:jobs.'Further, there is not-a niche for the un- depiot certain concerns.fn-one language.as.com- ials
pleasant but productive and respected co-worker pared to .another.: himaJdng :predicijo~:ab0ut pas
as there is in the U.S.A,' As another piece of .the- translation-of humor,'violence, aad inter- ials
evidence' f~r: the: Hypothesis; <many .:Fillpino '), personal relations. between I Bnglish.andFilipino, ges
m6Vies are-very 'romantic and sentimentalr'so ~:w~ ..are predicting that certain.. cultW:al~~~~QS to
"muchsothat :tl1e Hollywood-import Love"S;ory will be reflected in the .two.languages. M~~~Pa1 Ian:
"{b~ooon:Erich·'Segal's'hovel}was.not abighit, .~ep~~~~~ ~,0t;l~ .?{ ~e ,~~,gua~js,~,lfus be- is :
fitlresumably because 'the'story'llnewas common . ~ore ~f~~u~l.t~ ,~W1V~y .m.~~, 9~~~ l~~~~, con
::~are.: ~olIecti()ns 'of 'Fillpino 'poetry support . an 4}his WU ~e}.:eflec~e~ ~,.~sp~n~e~~:,~tin~
"~his 'View;' much' 'ofthe: 'writing would,be con- aft~r, ~~f~a(the: m~~~ri~:' ' '.',. ,,' l,.,:.",,:'" i,',;~\' Mal
\sideredi slightly' maudlin to Americans•.:; .~.. ,8•.The: .ratings.: for .matetial of.a factual ;I}~~"fe
,. ,"bl making pfedic~~~s abouilang6aieand would be ~ateq approximately,equal.asJQ.m,-
lish
.f~~ rei~tioiI' to humor, violence, andInterper- formative .content. Factual materi~,was~4~~,d tWI
's.omil.'.relaponii; the topic known as 'theice Sapir- tothis study as a. sort .of '.'COl)t,{op<~~~ar¢.t
sag'
.' Whod" hypotHesis·, (reviewed by Mi11e'r' 'and on measures ofinformation~conveyan~\iq ,~r~s-
'~.~~eU~ ~ i 9~~)~~ being b~oa~hed. IIi its~trohg- ,latiq~ inWic~t~s }hat factual ,.ma~erial .. Fiffi; ~f En!
in J
'est version, the, Sapit-Wh6tf hypothesis ·states.t~shlt~dA~ ~~~peqple"c~ ~c()y~r;~~i~~n on('
~t tli( llm,gu~g{ people speak shapes their work, with.the ;Jl!for~t~on-f~gar~e~8(\W~~· t oth
'perceptions 'df the 'world arid ultimately: their ther they see the original or translated version. I
, behaVi,or,' The 'causal' ,link"is',propos~d 't<{be ,~iV~ri"~e"possi1)n~it jo/f)trans~atmg"'f~ctijM 'j low and
.~uage~be~aYi~r. E~piricil" research lias'.riot 'inforrilation plus the 6bsentiltion'tha'fa'ffe'Ctive
I
All
supported this strong'version Of the hypothesls, material is more difficult!to:trahslaiei'{NtdA, Enp
' . ",:,.' ..... ,,, . . . ,. ( . ..1976);thenthe:present·rating.techniqueslto.u,l~
. "A modest view-of the hypothesis-Is more -also . indicate..the relatize-. ease ::of. ,transl~u.ng tha
wrii
in line With that accepted by a number'of peo- I information in comparison toaffecti~e.Iffill~IiiaJ. .\
lati:
"pie' who -have .done' research. on translation/ Thus.we.predicted more similarratings b:e~lW~n
pub
.interpretation. (e.g., .Brislin I ,1976). People. in·a versions of the affective material,.as p~t~
this
,
.give.li, culture, place. a, high value: on' certain in hypotheses 5, 6, and 7. :
behaviors, ideas, or ,material possessions.; Exam- II.."", ';. (,d./ . "!'~ ',In: ;!1I the!
pIes ·are snow' for· Eskimos, horses· for Arabs, I SPECIFIC 'METHODOLOGY ,'····'1 ! ';!;
;...... •
I'
. •e .automobile for' Americans, and kinship for OF THE PRESENT'STUDY-; 1;;1.:;-'1 \
. tribes in New; Guinea. These concerns are·then 'Raten , .' ,<I . ' :" .':. ""; ,;',)

reflected ,in the ~ulture's .language,. and ·the . , .',~ Thirty-two.· college .students',; from' , the wit;
language develops ·so 'that· the concerns can.be .University· of the Philippines,: fluentdn ,both and
 TH~' MJ::ASU~EMB.NT; ;O~; AFFEOTIVE CONTENT .,,' 63.'

~J:lg!.imlW4 I1ilipiJlp, w~~:ask,!,d;Jo·,particip~te. """ . "TABLE 1 'J i .i,:~· ,.y;':

in"th.~.. s~udy,! Thqy;~er~,.told that.they, wq~:!
re~~ .'sOl1Je.~.ijnglis1;l. ..language: ,~~/or' Filipino
13Q~ge passages-and would then makeratings..
Among the: 42.llltersJ' 1:8 were, females.and. 14.
were males, their ages ranging.from, 1~22.years. i . , .. '
\YhP~;~~!?i.s~ is!~l~~ag~ ?f~sb:u;c~on at the
':, 'Various Orders' ofDo~aindt~ted'~y! . ;.. ' .;
. , .~. .:.. Participants in the Study'" ' • ,'. ",'1
, .' , : ; ' : . " ,,: ,!".:, " ,1,1 I:''':! " :,.
. "~I Humor Violence'Pllctual! Inter•. '
,,' . " ' , . ' .!" -.', r , per8p~I,;,
'. "Pi.!1l\l·: t , .:.

U~iv,efS~.t>.' of ~~: p~ppip~s,.a , number of Pure ~anmaage .Group., I' .. · · : ,; '. .: '."

, elective"Courses'are"
I I ','
I • '..'
'available in Filipino. All'
•\ ,.' ~ I • . •
! '
~ I'
Group 1 E* .r., E..
: " .
E '. :1 E " ~
: t . . I "

raters ~d c~osen tota~e at lea~t one college G.roup2· F* . ,.F, : : F 'i; I F"II
'ourse;in 'which"'Filipinowas the language of ':.. ., , .: ,,1',. " ;.'ii"'·
irl~truction.·:!:i".,q~::T '.'1 . "':: :'. ' ""',' Mixed Language .', ,:, ' .. ,..... ' 'j;::' I."
" jr;II":'fh~\~t~r~"\Jer~":~~d~lniy aSsi~ed 'to: Gmup(MLG) . , ! . , .• .«, ,. ' • •';

twomajorgroups.Onegroupwasgiven·i'na'ter~' :.:',' Group3,···"'E' 'E:'" '~'F; ','F'"

ials coiltaihirtg·'sdlely"Englishlor. Solely Filipino Group 4 Ii·' "'F .', .,; EI' l:lf('i
passages'whiIe':'/Uiotner';group was'givim mater- G~oup5 E. ,.,,1':;"'."', 1':\" IE
i ials containing both EngllshandFilipinopassa- Group6,,: F .'.,1,' E,:,
i ..I.E:. lP
. ges. i Thi8,.lat~et,: group Was further.eubdivided qroup 7: . ;,E '.. ~ " .'. ' E, F
I to control for order of presentation in either (;fou~ ,~.., F ,. . ~." ,. f.., lE
I language in the differe~ dp~a,ins •. ~.oW~ibe~9,\Y. *E - English ." ." ',',' II.
, is a table, Qf ~~ gr~~~~gs". ~ph }lfg~,roup ..~s I *F - Filipino '. ' . I" : I: .".... .':
camposed of four raters" (Refer.. to ,~~bl~: 1.) There are.4 raters in·each of the S,.subgroups. '\ :,
I'.
\ ' 'I ~;: ,'~.. • ,': C .': '.:~ .. ~' . ! '1,·
rMaterials' .
., ....
' . "
: , to the do the same, "Hold vine, Jane!" But
Passages': iii' Filipino'translated into 'Eng-: Jane thoughtshe heard'hinl'saY,'''Hold mine."
Iish and ~.<;~:.~e~~ W?~ .,t~~,e~ . F9~ each domain, So she did ·and quickly grabbed it. Tarzan'
two passages were given.
. . ." . 1;.
~ '.
In thecase
i I , ' ':.',
of the pas-
I : " I . , '. . ,
emitted a ,painful shriek 'and his.famous ."aaah,
sages given in Filipino, C;)I:1e:f~.originally written aaah" cry started from then on.
in Fi»'Pi~:o,,~~le the oilier: ~s ~. t~ansi~p~~ Xr~qli ,"Green' Jokes' in Cebuarto 'Foudore::
English. Th'e' con~elt:Se i~.~I1Je· ~o~ .English, i.e., An Analysis ~f their soci.o-dult~raI. '
one is.. originally 'f',~,~te.n I fP Er.g~sh. w¥~ th~, Context. Lillian Garcia. Cebu City:" ; ,I
other is a translation from Filipino. Shown be- University ( of -San- Catlos,.. 1972',' ", .:»:
low (, Ali ;'th~! p'assages' used fo'i' the' :experiJnen t
Appendix III, p. 16;' ' , . ; : ' "
and"iridit'ated also' are" theirres~e;ttive-' sources; :
Ai of the passages origin'a1I~ written in either t b. Hum~rous (originaily~ntten in Fili-
~ EJlgii'sh oi 'Fillpulo: 'ate· from published sources pino) " ". . . ,
that are available to a wide'audience: none were "Do you love me?'" ". ;;. .,
written solely for this study ~ Some of the trans- "Withmy whole heart'and soul'" , " r·
lations! are also, available in:widely.distrfbuted "Are·your ready to diejust for me?"
published sources, Some were, prepared only for "Oh no ... my love knows no death! "
,
tth~~J~~~Yll'lID,~: ~~se ru,-~, ~oted . ~~~~W inyaren. r: .

eSlS. Liwayway. Liwayway Publishing

"', : la.:·~uihofduk (oti8in8J.ly'·'yjtitt~n ~ Eng- House .. (J~.2~,,197~)p ..70.(Trans-
, I . ' . ' ','IisH)' .. ···' ,""Ii ," ,. . ' ,'. . ,': ' :
lated for this. study by ,Rogelio V.
I!!... '. ," :.; :: " . '.' : Tangco, Univ:ersity of the Philip·
.: "I ,A s~rpeQt at.tack~d: Tarzan and, Jane:
·pines). ' . .
while t.1tey ~~re up ~n ~. tree. Tarzan pani*~d:
and grabbed 3, nearby vine; He,directed Jane, , 2a. Violent (originally written in,English)
 ",/"", d'II'" ""'" dOd, -i .' j ..

64 VIRGILIO G. ENRIQUEZ AND RICHARD W. BRISLIN

,A

• Then Brasi took an axe from its place second time since they had met, his mouth
11f~,
I
against the wall and started hacking at one of was hard on hers. But now his kisshad a tender- )'
I:
the Capone men. He chopped the man's feet ness, an unexpected gentleness thet took her
off, then the legs at the knees, then the thighs
!1
by surprise and drove away her fears. Expert 11:1
(
where they joined the torso. Brasi was an ex- in everythinghe did, Nikolaos wasa 'past master , , I,

" a
tremely powerful man but it took many swings in the art of makinglove. "

to accomplish' his purpose. By that time of "You're so beautiful." He breathed the

course the victim had given up the ghost and words against her lips. "I can't let you go. I love
the floor of the warehouse was slippery with you ". I want you ... Mylove, my love "! " "
ehe hacked fragments of his flesh and the
gouting of his blood. When Brasi turned to his Deeply he kissed her and after the first
next victim he found further effort unneces- moment of resistance she responded to him,
sary. The second Capone gunman out of sheer caught in an emotion that drowned all rational I
",
terror had, impossibly, swallowed the bath thought.
towel in his mouth and suffocated. Rachel Lindzey. The Taming of
Liza. Great Britain:' Chaucer Press,
The Godfather. Mario Puzo, Pan
1959, pp. 105-106.
Books, Ltd., London, 1970, p. 222.
The translation into Filipino is avail- 3b. Interpersonal (originally written in il
able in the article: Ang Karahasan Filipino)
sa Nobela at Pelikulang The God- "I'm all yours until n die il
father at ang Epekto nito sa MadIa. But, will you never forsake me also?" a
• Tao at Lipunan. Violet Lagmay.
p. 189.
the tight embrace
By which Tala was held by her oeloved
y
became tighter,
~
2b. Violent (originally written in Filipino) Her words were smothered by kisses.
y
He waslashed with a belt and a rope, Forget your apprehensions and worries,
and was forced to repeat dictated testimony; My love springs from my very soul; e:
like a crossword puzzle
If I were faithful S1
Were the lashes on his back, breast and arms, Throughout the years of our engagement,
but he didn't "confess" a thousand times more
Until he dropped on the floor like a log. n
Will I be devoted after we're married." .
if
Without any warninga bullet snarled And when the two became completely one b
It penetrated thru the back and entered the In embrace and kisses which never slacken, if
• heart of the heroic Tanggol in envy perhaps
He collapsed, bathed in his own blood, The moon sought shelter behind the douds,
But without retreating the wind inhaled
And holding on to his bolo in his delirium. The sweetness of. their fragrant vow.
Bayang Malaya. Amado V. Hernan- Bayang Malaya (see passage Zb.)
dez. Manila: Ateneo University Press, Translated by Eduardo Deveza. R
1969, pp. 68, ~2. Translated by 4a. Factual (originally written in English)
Eduardo Deveza. te
Two kinds of head banging have been
Ie
• 3a. Interpersonal (originally written in
English)
identified. In auto-erotic head banging, the child
bangs his head until he exhausts himself and
ti4
pi
"My God," he said. "You can't tum me falls asleep. Tantrum head banging. which
ea
down! " I love you Laura. I love you so much begins when the child is able to waik, is a
that ..:' He pulled her into his arms and for the reaction to being thwarted and frv .iratcd. The bJ
 THE MEASUREMENT OF AFFECfIVE CONTENT 65

"d throws himself to the ground, thrashes ciple that sentences are easier to translate than
and bangs his head. This behavior is not rhyth- single words, (Longacre, R958; Werner and
mical or absorbing and leaves the child ex- Campbell, 1969), and so the former were used
hausted, weakened, and fearful. Most studies since rating scales were prepared in both Eng-
of head banging, however, have focused on lish and Filipino, Second, 5.point scales rather
auto-erotic head banging. than 7.point scales were used because instruc-
Self-mutilating Behavior. David tions about the former are easier to communi.
Lester. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. cate. Given a sentence that labels the end of a
78, No.2, p. 121. The translation in- scale, the 5-point system can be explained gra-
to Filipino is part of this book: phically as follows:
• Ang Pananakit sa Sarili. V. G.
Enriquez at L. Antonio. Panana- (sentence) (sentence)
/iksik sa Slkolohiya: Diliman, Uni-
----
agree agree no ----
agree agree
bersidad ng Pilipinas: Publications very opinion very
Office, 1975, p. 275. much much

4b. Factual(originally written in Filipino) Third, sentences that would measure the affec-
The following can be used as a guide in tive content of the passages were used as dis-
interviewing: cussed in the presentation of hypotheses, in
Before you see your respondent, look contrast to the single words used to measure
into his social status, his personality, hobbies evaluation, potency, and activity in the stan-
and likes,and his environment. dard Osgood procedure.
.. At the start of the interview, introduce The scales in English and Filipino are
yourself. Be sincere. An honest introduction presented below. After reading a passage, raters
will help a lot in obtaining cooperation from indicated their feelings on the scales. The scales
your respondent. they rated were in the same language as the
If possible, memorize your conversation, passage. On the scales below, the numbering
except if the respondent is giving Information system used in analyzing the ratings is also
such as names, statistics or numbers. presented; the raters did not see this numbering
system.
In writing the report, try to quote the
a. I'liked reading 1 2 3 4 5 I did not like rea-
respondent's answers. He will be glad to see
this passage. ding this passage.
n print what he has said. This way he will b. I learned some 1 2 3 4 5 I did not learn
>e more friendly and will have greater trust new things by anything by rea-
nyou. reading this. ding this passage.
c. I understand 1 2 3 4 5 I did not under-
~ Peryodismong Pilipino. Leonardo P. what the author stand what the
Reyes. Cebu City: Habagatan Pub- wanted to author wanted to
lication, 1972, pp. 109-110. (Trans- explain. explain.
lated for this study by Rogelia Pe). d. I feel that the 1 2· 3 4 5 I feel that the
content of the content of the
~ating Scales passage is passage is not
humorous. humorous.
A number of changes were made in the
echniques designed by Osgood which should e. Heel that the 1 2 3 4 5 I feel that the
content of the content of the
,ad to improvements for the present applica- passage fa passage ill not
io~to the analysis of translation. First, com- violent. violent.
fete sentences were used to label the ends of f. I' feel that the 1 2 3 4 5 I feel that the
aeh scale in contrast to the single words used . author under- author does not
y Osgood. This modification follows the prin- stands the sub- underotand the
 '-~-----11
r ,,"" l""I."!·"," \", ",. '

VIRGILIO G. ENRIQUEZ AND RICHARD W. BRISLIN·

:·1
'I
.1
je;t matter subject matter TABLE 2 I
that is presen- that is presen- i w
ted. ted. Resultsof t-Tests for Comparisons Reported as sl
I feel thatthe 1 2 3 4 5 Ifeelthat the Significant in Text E
author was author was not r:>
sensitive to re- sensitive to rela- Signifi- ill
lations between tions between Passage Comparison Mean SD t cance lLe-
people. people. vel tr
! feel that the 1 2 3 4 5 I feel that the B
Ib Piliprno
author was sen- author was not sen- humor original 1.9 1.2 2.12 .05 SJ
sitive to how sitive to how vs fc
people express people express English rr
• otions, emotions. translation 2.8 1..') is
2a English 0'
RESULTS violence "riginal 1.5 .9 2.05 .05 5)
vs
"Statistical significance" or 'significant" Pilipino a'
the following description of the results . translatoni 2.2 .8
pi
fers to the .05 level, t-tests, with 30df. The bi
2b Pilipino
slk of the results is based on specific scales violence original 2.9 1.1 2.14 .05 n
tat correspond to each passage, e.g., the vs II
nnorous scale (letter "d") for the humorous English c«
issage, the violence scale (letter "e" for the translation 1.8 1.3 p:
olent passage, and so forth. 3a English
inter- original 1.4 .6 2.12 .05
Exact values for the t-testsare presented personal vs ·0'
r:tle 2. . Pilipino
translation 2.2 1.4
s<
Humorous passages were rated more so in t<
4a English tl
iJipino than in English, as predicted, if the factual original 1.6 1.6 2.04 .05' 01
issage was originally written in Filipino. The vs fc
lean for the Filipino version of passage lb is Pilipino
SI
.9 (S.D. = 1.2); for the English version, the translation 2.6 1.6
lean is 2.8 (S.D. =1.5); This is a statistically di
gnificant difference. The humorous passage ficance. For passage 2b, originally written in 81\
a) originally written in English was rated as Filipino, the English translation had a mean rat- TI
ightly more humorous in its Filipino version, ing of 1.8 (S.D. = 1.3) and tile Filipino original
ut the difference did not reach statistical n<
had a mean rating of 2.9 (S.D. = 1.1), a di§fe- bl
gnificance. Other scales (e.g., violence, learn renee that reaches statistical significance. Other d(
ev.whings) showed no differences between the scales not explicitly related to the passages Cll
vo versions. This is a positive fmding in favor (e.g., sensitivity to relations between people
f the technique since concepts unrelated to of
and to how people express emotions) were to
ie affective content of a passage should be rated the same for the different-language ver-
ited as similar across different-language ver- E,
sions.
ons. Results for the interpersonal passages of
Violent passages were rated more so in went against predictions. For passage 3a, origi- til
nglish and in Filipino, as predicted, regardless nally written in English, raters felt that "the fC'
t the passage's language of origin. Passage 2a, author was sensitive to relations between peo- ni
qally written in English, had a mean rating ple" to a greater degr~e than in the translated til
t l.S (S.D. = .9) in that version and a mean Filipinoversion(mean = 1.4,S.D. =" forEnglish; til
ting of 2.2 (S.D. = .8) in the Filipino transla- mean =2.2, S.D. =1.4for Filipino;the difference tr.
on, a difference that reaches statisticai signi- is significant). Ratings for the scale, "the author st:
 • lb" .\ . I~," ,.~ , ".'
THE MEASUREMENT OF AFFECfIVE CONTENT
•was sensitive to how people express emotions"
showed a similar pattern in favor of the original
Eng1ish -version. There were no differences in
ratings of the passages (3b) originally written
in Filipino. Behavioral scientists have no easier
task than to explain away unexpected findings.
But the temptation not to engage in nonsense
speculation is tempered by a well-internalized
feeling of responsibility to suggest possible
.easons for the data. One possible explanation
is that there are so many love-oriented novels,
of which passage 3a is a sample, that English-
speaking authors, through practice and the
availability of models, are very skillful at de-
picting emotion in this area. Filipino students,
bilingual in the Filipino and English languages,
may also be more accustomed to reading such
material in English in their leisure time since
commercial publishers in the Philippines still
print more books in English than in Filipino.
Factual material was rated as more infor-
ptive (scale "b": I learned some new things;
scale "c": I understand what the author wanted
to explain) in English ·than in Filipino when
the original (passage 4a) was in English. The
mean for passage4a, scale "b" was 1.6, S.D. = 1.6
for the English original; the mean was 2.6,
sd = 1.6 for the Filipino translation, a significant
difference. The pattern was similar for scale
"c", There were no differences in ratings of pas-
sage 4b, Filipino original vs. English translation.
This set of findings about factual material was
not. predicted in earlier sections of this paper,
but the results were not surprising. Early in the
iesign of this study the possibility was dis-
cussed (which is still the favored interpretation
of the results) that raters would be so accus-
tomed to reading complex factual material in
English as part of their schooling that the. Eng-
lish language would be preferred. Several pieces
ofevidence from this study and another support
this view. First, Sinaiko and Brislin (1973)
found the same phenomenon: Vietnamese tech-
Jlicians preferred an English manual because
tfIey had been trained with it, even though
they were able to work as effectively using a
translated manual. Second, raters in the present
study said that they "liked reading this passage"
• \' "I.", )
67
(scale "a" for passage 4a) significantly more
than the English version. Third, passage 4a is
probably more technically complex. than pas-
sage 4b: the latter was rated equivalently
across versions. Taken together, these findings
point to the strong possibility that materials
about complex subject matter will be preferred
in the language in which the subject matter
was learned. For less complex material, this
phenomenon will either not be so strong or
will disappear.
DISCUSSION
Results of the study demonstrate that
violent and humorous passages can be transla-
.ted between English and Filipino, but not with
exactly the same intensity. As predicted, passa-
ges were rated more humorous in Filipino
versions, and more violent in English versions.
The point must be made that the issue of non-
translatability is not under discussion. The
fmdings indicate that certain qualities are easier
to depict in certain languages. Further, this
study shows only that certain qualities are
easier to depict in written original mod target
language passages.
These findings have application to the
training of translators and interpreters. Trainees
could have their work analyzed, according to the
method outlined above, to determine the
amount of affect contained in their translation
in contrast to the original language version.
They could then adjust their efforts to produce
a translation more like the original version.
For some areas, such as romance/love passages
in English (as mentioned in the "Results"
section), there will be many models available
from which to obtain ideas about ways of
depicting various aspects of the passages. Other
types of changes might be tried. For instance,
interpreters might concentrate on vocal in-
flection and emphasis if they are convinced
that they have done as much as possible in
their choice of vocabulary.
An important point to consider is who
decides what the effective content is in In pas-
sage that should be translated. Often, the
 68 VIRGILIO G. ENRIQUEZ AND RICHARD
• •
translator/interpreter is the person who makes
this decision. Mistakes sometimes arise at this
step, not in subsequent transformation to ano-
ther language. Interpreters often have to make
decisions quickly during fast-moving discussions
between communicators. In analyzing literary
works, on the other hand, translators have
more time to search out authors' views about
their work and to read the opinions of respec-
.ted critics. If other demonstrations like that
in the present study show differences in affect
across translations, perhaps more attention will
be given to a conscious decision about exactly
what affect should be conveyed. This is ulti-
mately the communicator's decision, not the
translator's. For instance, a communicator
could write down exactly what affect is to be
conveyed as part of a message to another per-
son (e.g., firmness presented in a diplomatic
way; willingness to negotiate in the future;
anger, but implicitly rather than explicitly
expressed). This set of notes would be an addi-
• on to the actual message. Perhaps another
method would be inclusion of the translator/
interpreter in all discussions that precede the
actual meeting at which the multi-language
communication takes place. By sitting in on
planning meetings, the interpreter is more
likely to understand the various aspects of what
is to be communicated and.so should be more
effectivein the actual communication situation.
The techniques described here may be
applicable to the broader field of the relation
between culture, language, and behavior. If
jarious types of material are examined to
determine what can and cannot be easily
described in a certain language, the results may
give insights into important aspects of various
cultures. likewise, such results may lead to
predictions about what aspects of behavior
are likely to be especially sensitive during
cross-cultural encounters. For instance, the
results of this study suggest that Americans
living in the Philippines should be careful
!bout hostile arguments in public and should
cultivate a sense of humor. These techniques
are also practical in their application since
(I) they are not expensive, being based only
W. BRISLIN
on paper-and-pencil instruments; and (2), they
can be used with college-level students (who
are bilingual in most parts 'of the world) who
will probably enjoy the active involvement in
research which the techniques encourage.
,;
REFERENCES
ANDERSON, R. Perspective on the role ofinterpftltor.
In R. Brislin (Ed.), Translation: A""lication and
Research. New York: WHey/Halsted Division,
1976.
BRISLIN, R. Back-translation for cross-cultural re-
search. Journal of Cross-Culturol Psychology,
1970,1, 185-216.
BRISLIN, R. Translation issues: multi-language ver-
sions and writing translatable lEnglish. Proceedings
of the 80th Annual Convention of the Americon
Psycnologica! Association, 1972,299-300.
BRISLIN, R., Ed. Translation: Application and Re-
search. New York: Wiley/Halsted Division, 1976.
BRISLIN, R., LONNER, W. and THORNDIKE, R.
Cro ss-Cultural Research Methods. New York:
Wiley/lnterscience Division, 1973•
CARlfifO, L. Theory oflanguage an& language acquisi-
tion: its sociolinguistic aspect, Philippine Journal
for Language Teaching, 1975,8, 58-66.
ENRIQUEZ, V. G. Ang wikang Filipino sa Sikolohiyll.
Paper read at the informal table conference on the
development of the Philippine National language;
scientific terminology as part of the elaboration
and intellectualization of Pilipino, Peany Room,
Manila Royal Hotel, December 7, 1976.
ERVIN-TRIPP, S. L~age and TAT content in
French English billinguals. Journal 01 Abnonnal
and SocialPsychology, 1964,68,500-507.
GERVER, D. Empirical studies on simultaneous inter-
pretation: a review and a model In R. Brislin
(Ed.), Translation: Application and Research, New
Yok: Wiley/Halsted Division, 1976,165-207.
GUTHRIE, G., and AZORES, F. Philippine interper-
sonal behavior patterns. In W.. Bello and A. de
Guzman (&1s.), Modemication: Its Impact in the
Philippines (IPe Papers No.7). Manila: Ateneo de
Manila University Press, 1968.
JOCANO, F. Growing Up in a Philippine Barrio. New
York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1969.
LAZO, L. A comparison of translation equivalence
indices. Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of the
Philippines, 1974.
,. THE MEASUREMENT OF AFFECfIVE CONTENT
LONGACRE, R. Items in context - their bearings on
: translation theory. Languoge, 1958, 34, 482-491.
MILLER, G., and McNEIL, D. Psychoiinguistics. In G.
Lindzey and E. Aronson (Eels.), Handbook of
Social Psychology, Vol. 3, 2nd ed, Reading, Mass:
Addison-Wesley, 1968,666-794.
MORALES·GOULET, R. Bilingualism in the Philip-
pine Setting. Quezon City: Souvenir Publications,
n.d.
tW>A, E. Toward a Science of Translation. Leiden,
Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1964.
NIDA, E. A framework for the analysis and evaluation
of theories of translation. In R. Brislin, (Eel.),
Translation: Applicotions and Research, New
York: Wiley/Halsted Division, 1976, 47·91.
OSGOOD, C. Cross-cultural comparability in attitude
measure-ment via multilingual semantic differen-
tials. In I. Steiner and M. Fishbein (Eels.), Cun-ent.
Studies in Social Psychology. New York: Holt,
Rinehart, and Winston, 1971,95-106.
OSGOOD, C. Exploration in semantic space: a per-
sonal diary. Joumal of Social Issues, 1971, 27,
.,s~4.
OSGOOD, C., SUCI, G., and TANNENBAUM; O. The
Measurement of Meaning, Urbana, III.: University
oflllinois Press. 1957.
•
OSGOOD, C., MAY, W., and MIRON, M. Cross-
69
Cultural Universals of Affective Meaning. Urbana,
III.: University of IllinoisPress, 1975.
PRINCE, R., and MOMBOUR, W. A teclmique for im-
proving 1inguistic equivalence in cross-cultural sur-
veys. International Journal of Social Psychiatry,
1967,13,229-237.
SIMMEL, G. The trial. In K. Wolff (Trans, and JEd.),
The Sociology of George SimmeL New York: The
Free Press, 1964.
SINAIKO, H., and BRISLIN, R. Evaluating language
translations: experiments on three assessment
methods. Journal of Applied Psychology, :i973,
57,328-334.
SNIDER, J., and OSGOOD, C. (Eds.) Semantic Dif-
ferential Technique: A Sourcebook. Chicago: AI-
dine, 1969.
TWENTY, R., and HOEMANN, H. Back translation: a
method for the analysis of manual languages. Sign
LanguogeStudies, 1973,2, 51-80.
WERNER, 0., and CAMPBELL, D. Translating, work-
ing through interpreters, and the problem of decen-
tering. In R. Naroll and R. Cohen (Eels.), A Hand-
book of Methods in' Cultural Anthropology. New
York: Natural History Press, 1970,398-420.
 ','

Subscribe
to the

1
PSSC SOCIAL SCIENCE INFORMATION and,
pho
clini
irres
resu
the quarterly newsletter of the hip,l1
the
rem
PHILIPPINE SOCIAL SCIENCE COUNCIL mea
the
fern
'. AIle
1,8]
pict
Hen
can'
Annual subscription rates: PIS.OO/US$8.00 it v
tots
Mar
Back issues available at P4.S0/US$2.S0 per
fled
(19'
dire
itel1
An
tull:
rod
in a
dev'

• con

70 enc
wh