Mode	Text / Speech	Sentence #			Subordinations
					English 1	English 2
Legal translation	FCPA	200			6	6
Target language	Reordering Σi=1n-1 Σj=i+1n     I(xj<xi)	± Nestings   { }                  {{ }}                {{{ }}}			Semantic changes Δ
Turkish 1	5	③	—	—	③
Turkish 2	5	④	—	—	⑤

Differences in analysis:

1. In “English 1,” [5] is seen as an adjunct to [3] – “deemed under subsection (a).” In “English 2,” [5] is seen as an adjunct to [4] – “to arise under subsection (a).” (Neither [3] nor [4] are reflected in the Turkish translation.)

2. In English, [2] says “for such failure to file” (meaning “for failure to file as described above”). In Turkish, [2] says “for an offense such as failure to file” (meaning “for failure to file or for a similar offense”). In both analyses, this structural change, though occurring within a single proposition, is seen as significant enough to be flagged as a change in semantic relations. But the change is flagged differently in each analysis. In “Turkish 1,” [2] is treated as a single proposition, with [5] modifying an element in [2]. In “Turkish 2,” [2] is treated as two separate propositions – “[for an offense] [such as failure to file].”

Reasons:

1. Sometimes a modifying proposition can be seen as modifying an element in one or another of a pair of propositions, one of which is subordinate to the other. In some contexts, choosing one or the other reading makes little or no difference in meaning. This is the case in a sentence like “He plans to stay home to save money,” where it basically makes no difference whether “to save money” is seen as the reason for his plan or as the reason for him to stay home. In other contexts, the difference in meaning can be big. This is the case in a sentence like “He refuses to stay home to save money,” where seeing “to save money” as the reason for his refusal is quite different from seeing it as the reason for him to stay home. In the above sentence from the FCPA, it basically makes no difference whether subsection (a) is seen as a provision which might lead to the view that a penalty arises or as a provision which, in the view of some, might lead to a penalty arising.

2. For ease of comparison, the translated or interpreted versions of each sentence are segmented in the same way as the original English version, unless another language version is felt to be significantly different in structure from the original. In “Turkish 1,” [2] is treated as a single proposition, to match the segmenting in English. In “Turkish 2,” [2] is treated as two separate propositions, whose combined structural effect is felt to be significantly different from the English original.

Consequences:

1. The new analysis would lead to a count of 4 rather than 3 for changes in single nestings in the Turkish translation.

2. The new analysis would lead to a count of 5 rather than 3 changes in semantic relations in the Turkish translation.