<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.3/JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xml:lang="en">
<front>
<journal-meta>
  <journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">46</journal-id>
  <journal-id journal-id-type="short-title">gssr</journal-id>
  <journal-id journal-id-type="doi">10.31703/gssr</journal-id>
  <journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Global Social Sciences Review</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">gssr</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group>
  <issn publication-format="print">2520-0348</issn>
  <issn publication-format="electronic">2616-793X</issn>
  <self-uri xlink:href="https://gssrjournal.com"/>
  <publisher>
    <publisher-name>Humanity Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Pakistan</publisher-loc>
  </publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
  <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">391121</article-id>
  <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.31703/gssr.2021(VI-IV).14</article-id>
  <article-id pub-id-type="other" specific-use="submission-id">1590</article-id>
  <article-version article-version-type="publisher">1.0</article-version>
  <article-categories>
    <subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
      <subject>article</subject>
    </subj-group>
  </article-categories>
  <title-group>
    <article-title xml:lang="en">A Contrastive Analysis of Predicated Thematic Structures in the English Novel and its Urdu Translation</article-title>
  </title-group>
<contrib-group>
  <contrib contrib-type="author" seq="1" corresp="yes">
    <name>
      <surname>Yaqub</surname>
      <given-names>Humaira</given-names>
    </name>
    <role vocab="credit" vocab-identifier="https://credit.niso.org/" vocab-term="Conceptualization" vocab-term-identifier="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/conceptualization/">Conceptualization</role>
    <role vocab="credit" vocab-identifier="https://credit.niso.org/" vocab-term="Writing – original draft" vocab-term-identifier="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-original-draft/">Writing – original draft</role>
    <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/>
    <xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"/>
  </contrib>
  <contrib contrib-type="author" seq="2">
    <name>
      <surname>Ahsan</surname>
      <given-names>Ansa</given-names>
    </name>
    <role vocab="credit" vocab-identifier="https://credit.niso.org/" vocab-term="Writing – review &amp; editing" vocab-term-identifier="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/">Writing – review &amp; editing</role>
    <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"/>
  </contrib>
  <contrib contrib-type="author" seq="3">
    <name>
      <surname>Iqbal</surname>
      <given-names>Mubashir</given-names>
    </name>
    <role vocab="credit" vocab-identifier="https://credit.niso.org/" vocab-term="Writing – review &amp; editing" vocab-term-identifier="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/">Writing – review &amp; editing</role>
    <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"/>
  </contrib>
  <aff id="aff1">
    <label>1</label>
    <institution-wrap>
      <institution>PhD Candidate, Government College University Faisalabad and Lecturer, GIFT University Gujranwala</institution>
    </institution-wrap>
    <addr-line>Punjab</addr-line>
    <country>Pakistan</country>
  </aff>
  <aff id="aff2">
    <label>2</label>
    <institution-wrap>
      <institution>University of Gujrat, Gujrat</institution>
    </institution-wrap>
    <named-content content-type="author-role">Lecturer</named-content>
    <addr-line>Punjab</addr-line>
    <country>Pakistan</country>
  </aff>
  <aff id="aff3">
    <label>3</label>
    <institution-wrap>
      <institution>University of Gujrat, Narrowal</institution>
    </institution-wrap>
    <named-content content-type="author-role">Lecturer</named-content>
    <addr-line>Punjab</addr-line>
    <country>Pakistan</country>
  </aff>
</contrib-group>
<author-notes>
  <corresp id="cor1">Corresponding Author: Humaira Yaqub, PhD Candidate, Government College University Faisalabad and Lecturer, GIFT University Gujranwala, Punjab, Pakistan.</corresp>
<fn fn-type="COI-statement" id="fn-coi">
  <p>The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.</p>
</fn>
<fn fn-type="ethics-statement" id="fn-ethics">
  <p>This study did not require formal ethics approval.</p>
</fn>
<fn fn-type="data-availability-statement" id="fn-data">
  <p>Data sharing is not applicable to this article.</p>
</fn>
</author-notes>
<pub-date pub-type="epub" date-type="pub" publication-format="electronic">
  <day>31</day>
  <month>12</month>
  <year>2021</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="collection">
  <month>12</month>
  <year>2021</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date date-type="pub" publication-format="print">
  <day>16</day>
  <month>02</month>
  <year>2022</year>
</pub-date>
  <volume>6</volume>
  <issue>4</issue>
  <season>Fall</season>
  <fpage>144</fpage>
  <lpage>160</lpage>
  <history>
    <date date-type="accepted">
      <day>16</day>
      <month>02</month>
      <year>2022</year>
    </date>
  </history>
<funding-group>
  <funding-statement>
<p>The authors received no specific funding for this work.</p>
  </funding-statement>
</funding-group>
<permissions>
  <copyright-year>2021</copyright-year>
  <copyright-holder>Humanity Publications</copyright-holder>
  <license license-type="open-access" xml:lang="en" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">
    <license-p>This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.</license-p>
  </license>
</permissions>
<self-uri content-type="text/html" xlink:href="https://gssrjournal.com/article/a-contrastive-analysis-of-predicated-thematic-structures-in-the-english-novel-and-its-urdu-translation"/>
<self-uri content-type="pdf" xlink:href="https://gssrjournal.com/pdf/gssr/8Zaw9IvxHx.pdf"/>
<supplementary-material id="suppl-pdf" content-type="pdf" xlink:href="https://gssrjournal.com/pdf/gssr/8Zaw9IvxHx.pdf">
  <label>PDF</label>
  <caption>
    <title>Full Text PDF</title>
  </caption>
</supplementary-material>
  <abstract>
    <p>The study investigates the predicated thematic structures in the English text and its Urdu translation. The first objective is to define the variations in the Urdu translation of English predicated thematic structures. The second objective is to define how the variations in Urdu translation affect the thematic progression. The data has been collected from the English novel Things Fall Apart by Achebe (1958) and its Urdu translation Bikharti Duniya by Ullah (1991). The UAM Corpus Tool has been used to annotate the data and to find predicated thematic structures and their thematic progression.The findings show that the Urdu translation of English predicated themes is ambiguous and misleading. The English predicated themes have been translated as Urdu unmarked and marked ideational themes. Such unmotivated displacement of themes affects thematic progression. There occur some variations in the thematic progression of translated Urdu themes.</p>
  </abstract>
<kwd-group kwd-group-type="author-keywords">
  <kwd>Thematic Predication</kwd>
  <kwd>Thematic Progression</kwd>
  <kwd>Corpus</kwd>
  <kwd>English</kwd>
  <kwd>Urdu</kwd>
</kwd-group>
  <custom-meta-group>
    <custom-meta><meta-name>views</meta-name><meta-value>1085</meta-value></custom-meta>
    <custom-meta><meta-name>downloads</meta-name><meta-value>0</meta-value></custom-meta>
    <custom-meta><meta-name>html-views</meta-name><meta-value>0</meta-value></custom-meta>
    <custom-meta><meta-name>google-scholar-citations</meta-name><meta-value>0</meta-value></custom-meta>
    <custom-meta><meta-name>crossref-citations</meta-name><meta-value>0</meta-value></custom-meta>
  </custom-meta-group>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<sec id="sec-1">
  <title>Introduction</title>
<p>Systemic Functional Linguistics considers a language functional. The structure of a language is important only to serve the function. In SFL, lexicogrammar deals with grammatical descriptions and different meanings of a language (Eggins, 2004). SFL emphasizes a dimension called metafunctions which consist of ideational, interpersonal, and textual components. The first metafunction refers to the ability of a language to construe human experience into experiential and logical categories. The second metafunction embodies the ability of a language to negotiate social roles and attitudes. The third metafunction discusses the ability of a language to maintain a thematic structure in discourse. A thematic structure is the element of a clause that conveys a message. In each clause, one element is given prominence i. e. ‘Theme.’There is one further resource that contributes to the organization of a clause as a message. This is the system of predicated themes that involves a particular combination of thematic and informational choices.</p><p>This study finds the answers to two questions: (1) what are the variations in the Urdu translation of English predicated thematic structures, and (2) how the variations affect the thematic progression of predicated thematic structures. The answers to these questions have been investigated in Achebe’s novel. He has used predicated themes of emphasis and contrast in his novel. Through these structures, he has expressed the feelings, emotions, and actions of his countrymen to explain that they are a civilized nation.</p><p>The present research is a theoretical addition to the studies of SFL. Some previous studies have discussed the material clause themes (e.g., Yaqub et al., 2017), the syntactic variations (e.g. Tahir, 2019), the contrastive analysis of thematic structures (e.g. Riaz, 2018), and the hypotactic and paratactic thematic relations (e.g. Yaqub &amp; Shakir, 2019) in English and Urdu. But to the best of the researcher’s knowledge, the existing literature lacks a contrastive analysis of the English and the Urdu predicated thematic structures.</p><p>This study is structured as follows—the Section 2 reviews relevant literature. The Section 3 discusses the elements of predicated themes and the patterns of thematic progression in detail. The methodology of this research is given in Section 4. The findings and results are given in Section 5. Section 6 concludes by presenting the variations in the predicated thematic structures and thematic progression.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec-2">
  <title>Literature Review</title>
<p>The current study reviews the literature on the contrastive analysis of predicated themes and thematic progression in English and some other languages. But there exists no relevant literature on the contrastive analysis of predicated themes and thematic progression in English and Urdu. In a contrastive study of English and French, Péry-Woodley (1989) analyzed English and French essays of students and found thematic predication in c’est-clefts structures of French parallel to it-clefts of English. With the extensive studies on it-clefts in English, the complementary contrastive studies of French clefts are rare (Katz, 2000). Another contrastive study of it-clefts and wh-clefts in English and Swedish texts were reported by Johansson (2002) in which he commented on the functional differences. A major grammatical difference was identified by Van Huffel (2007) in predicated themes from English and its translated Dutch fiction text. He commented that a few cases of theme predication is similar in English and Dutch texts, but English predicated structure takes singular verb with empty subject and plural complement, but Dutch predicated structure receives plural verb with empty subject and plural complement. Another research has been conducted for the analysis of thematic structures in Barack Obama’s press conference (Kuswoyo, 2016). In this particular research, the appearance of predicated themes, including it-clefts has been reported with other types of themes. Along with the studies on thematic predication, some other studies were reported to identify the general thematic progression. Sade (2007) examined the thematic progression in Christian tracts written in Nigeria and found simple linear and constant thematic progression patterns. Moreover, Sari (2009) explored psychological, grammatical, and logical subjects and their conflation and combination with one another in a declarative clause. Sujatna (2013) observed the thematic progression of Sundanese female writers and found them using simple and multiple thematic progression in terms of linear theme and constant theme and rheme. This is a unique study due to investigating the element of theme and their functions. Thematic structures have been treated in a contrastive manner by Munday (1998, 2000), Taboada (1995), McCabe (1999) McCabe, and Alonso Belmonte (2001). To assign thematic status to the process element has investigated by Arús Lavid and Moratón (2012), Lavid (2010) and Lavid Arús and Moratón (2010a).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec-3">
  <title>Theoretical Foundation</title>
<p><bold>Predicated Thematic
Structures</bold></p> <p>The
predicated thematic structures are specified as it-cleft sentences (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Halliday1994">Halliday, 1994</ext-link>), which
direct the receiver&apos;s attention to an emphasized news in a particular
information unit. It-cleft is used as an empty subject which allows a certain
element to become a theme (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Baker">Baker, 1992</ext-link>).
It-cleft sentences involve a contrastive emphasis, and they are thematizing
structures (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Thompson">Thompson, 1996).</ext-link> They
contribute to an emphasis on feelings and actions. They are used to contrast
what is already said with what is important to be emphasized.</p> <p>The
system of predicated thematic structure is associated with the organization of
the clause as a message (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Halliday1967">Halliday,
1967</ext-link>). It includes a grammatical structure in the form of a cleft
construction (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Halliday1994">Halliday,
1994</ext-link>) which conveys significant meanings. This grammatical structure
begins with ‘it-cleft’ (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Prince">Prince, 1978</ext-link>),
‘it-theme (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Young">Young, 1980</ext-link>),
‘cleft construction’ (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Huddleston">Huddleston,
1984</ext-link>), or ‘focusing it-sentence’ (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Erdmann">Erdmann, 1990</ext-link>). According to the semantic
and functional value, cleft sentences are used for emphatic meanings. The cleft
sentence is divided into two parts i. e. the matrix clause starting with a
meaningless pronoun, a copula verb, a highlighted element, and an embedded
relative clause. Here, it is important to note that the pronoun <italic>it</italic> is a
dummy subject and is known as a cleft pronoun. The predicated thematic
structures can propose a double thematic analysis (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Halliday2004">Halliday &amp; Matthiessen, 2004</ext-link>). The
subsequent figure displays the double analysis of predicated thematic
structure. In (a), the cleft pronoun <italic>i</italic>s an unmarked theme, and in (b),
the whole matrix clause is considered a predicated theme, and the whole
embedded clause is a rheme. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Collins">Collins
(1991: 170)</ext-link> refers to version (b) as &quot;metaphorical
analysis in which the superordinate clause is all thematic&quot;. Consider the
following example.</p> <p><break/></p>  <table-wrap id="table1"><label>Table 1</label><caption><title>Predicated Thematic Structure in English</title></caption><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="6" valign="top"> <p><bold>English Predicated Thematic Structure</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>It</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>was</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>her father</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>who</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>persuaded her to continue.</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>a.</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>Theme</p> </td><td colspan="2" valign="top"> <p>Rheme</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>Theme</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>Rheme</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>b.</p> </td><td colspan="3" valign="top"> <p>Predicated theme</p> </td><td colspan="2" valign="top"> <p>Rheme</p> </td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap>  <p><break/></p> <p>Version
(b) has been used to analyze the predicated thematic structures in English and
Urdu. Urdu is a pro-drop (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Hasan">Hasan, 1984</ext-link>) and SOV (head-final) (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Butt2005">Butt &amp; King, 2005</ext-link>) language that has free word order, unlike
English. The predicated thematic structures in Urdu do not begin with it-cleft
because Urdu lacks clefts. Urdu introduces the subordinating that-clause as an
extra posed clause starting with an expletive. The morpheme <italic>y</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>h</italic> ‘it’ is used as an expletive in Urdu (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Raza">Raza &amp; Ahmed, 2011</ext-link>) because the equivalent of expletive <italic>there</italic>
does not exist in Urdu (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Butt2007">Butt &amp; King, 2007</ext-link>). In English, the predicated
thematic structure involves a predicative formula i.e.
<italic>it + be + highlighted element + relative clause</italic>. In Urdu, the
demonstrative pronouns <italic>j</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>h </italic>‘this’,<italic> vo </italic>‘that’ are used as so-called
equivalents of it-cleft. These demonstrative pronouns are just referring
expressions (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Schmidt">Schmidt, 1999</ext-link>) which emphasize their
following noun phrases. These demonstrative pronouns precede a copula and an
NP. They function as dummy cleft pronouns in the Urdu predicated thematic structure.
These pronouns fail to agree with their copula, and they move an NP from its
unmarked position to the marked position. Furthermore, due to lack of agreement
with the copula, cleft pronouns are no longer considered true pronominal
expressions. In this case, cleft pronouns become dummy and empty subjects.</p> <p>The predicated thematic structure in Urdu also
incorporates an exclusive emphatic particle <italic>hi</italic>
‘very’ to emphasize its preceding NP. Such particle is used to exclude
something else which may not be expressed (Schmidt, 1999). Along with
emphasizing its preceding NP, this article can also precede its NP due to
flexibility of word order. This particle is also an optional element, but it
doubles the emphasis when it is used with cleft pronouns. The most interesting
point is that a clause initial NP can also become a predicated theme when this
NP corresponds to its copula verb.</p> <p>The Urdu copula verbs are <italic>he
</italic>‘is’,<italic> he? </italic>‘are’,<italic> hu? </italic>‘am’,<italic> t</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>h</italic><italic>?</italic>‘was’,<italic> t</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>he </italic>‘were’,<italic> t</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>hi </italic>‘was’.<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Young2014a"> Young (2014a)</ext-link> claims that copula is a traditional
grammatical term for verbs as &apos;helpers .&apos;In Urdu, a construction with optional
and dummy cleft pronouns <italic>j</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>h </italic>‘this’,<italic> vo </italic>&apos;that&apos;, and
a plural complement cannot have a singular verb. Similarly, a masculine
complement can have only masculine copula<italic> t</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>h</italic><italic>?</italic>&apos;was&apos;, and a
feminine complement can have a feminine copula <italic>t</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>hi </italic>&apos;was&apos;. It happens because Urdu
verbs are marked with tense, number, gender, and case (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Schmidt">Schmidt, 1999</ext-link>). They determine the gender
and number of pronominal subjects, which are merely distal and proximal
elements (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Schmidt">Schmidt, 1999</ext-link>). The Urdu
copulas appear after the predicated theme (NP), which is modified by a relative
clause. Furthermore, Urdu creates a
predicative formula i. e. <italic>cleft pronoun
(optional) +</italic> <italic>highlighted element +
exclusive emphatic particle (optional) + copular verb + relative clause</italic>. The
following examples given by <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Schmidt">Schmidt, 1999</ext-link>: 212) indicate the
predicated thematic structure in Urdu.</p> <p><bold><break/> </bold></p>  <table-wrap id="table2"><label>Table 2</label><caption><title>Predicated Thematic Structures in Urdu</title></caption><table><thead><tr><th colspan="4" valign="top"> <p><bold>Urdu Predicated thematic Structures</bold></p> </th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td valign="top"> <p>Ahmed hi</p> <p><italic>It… Ahmed</italic></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>he</p> <p><italic>is</italic></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>??s ne</p> <p><italic>Who</italic></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>h?me? roke r?kh?.</p> <p><italic>delayed us.</italic></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>Ahmed hi</p> <p><italic>It… Ahmed</italic></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>he</p> <p><italic>is</italic></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>?o</p> <p><italic>Who</italic></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>qil? d?ekhn? ??ht?? t?h?.</p> <p><italic>wanted to see the fort.</italic></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>jeh Ahmed hi</p> <p><italic>It… Ahmed</italic></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>he</p> <p><italic>is</italic></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>??s ne</p> <p><italic>who</italic></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>h?m ko roke r?kh?.</p> <p><italic>delayed us.</italic></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>jehi Ahmed</p> <p><italic>It… Ahmed</italic></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>he</p> <p><italic>is</italic></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>??s ne</p> <p><italic>who</italic></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>h?m ko
  roke r?kh?.</p> <p><italic>delayed us.</italic></p> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" valign="top"> <p>Predicated theme</p> </td><td colspan="2" valign="top"> <p>Rheme</p> </td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap>  <p><break/></p><p>Additionally, despite being a pro-drop
language, Urdu uses the third person pronouns <italic>j</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>h</italic> ‘this’ and <italic>vo</italic> ‘that’ as necessary
predicated themes. Actually, these pronouns are marked predicated themes which
convey new and contrastive information. And according to a fact, the Urdu
pronominal subject conveying new or contrastive information is never ellipsed
or dropped (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Hasan">Hasan, 1984</ext-link>). On the contrary, the
dropness affects so-called cleft pronouns, which are dropped due to contextual
requirements. Urdu accommodates the function of it-cleft according to its
contextual referring expressions. Such accommodation makes the writers
translate English predicated themes into Urdu easily.</p><p><break/></p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec-4">
  <title>Thematic Progression</title>
<p>The predicated thematic structures may be convertible to an information unit composed of two components: the first part is the theme and the second part is rheme (Halliday, 1985). In fact, the organization of predicated theme and rheme contributes to the thematic progression. The thematic progression develops the parameters for given and new information in the text and the context. It represents the text development (Grabe &amp; Kaplan, 1996) and organizes the texts into a coherent form (Butt et al., 2000). Generally, there is a subject known as point of departure in any clause containing another element as rheme. Theme contains given information while new information falls within the rheme. But the opposite is also common because new information is signaled by the prosodic prominence (Downing, 2001). The same is not true to the predicated theme because it is always a marked theme carrying new information (Halliday, 1985), and it consists of fixed prosodic prominence.</p><p>Thematic progression specifies the information flow in theme-rheme structures. Initially, three patterns of thematic progression: (1) simple linear, (2) constant, and (3) derived hyperthematic, were presented by Danes (1974). Additionally, the new patterns: split theme and split rheme were added in the theory of thematic progression by McCabe (1999). In linear thematic progression, the rheme of the preceding clause shifts into the theme of the subsequent clause. The rheme conveys new information while the theme conveys given information. In constant thematic progression, the same constituents in first theme are continuously selected as the theme of following clauses. The continuous selection of the same theme implies the repetition of the given information in many clauses. In splitting progression, the theme of the first clause splits into two items. Each item is considered a thematic element in the subsequent clause. Likewise, the information of the first theme splits and flows down into the following themes in chunks. These patterns are identified with reference to the semantic relations, including identical wording (like personal pronouns), synonymous expressions, paraphrases, and semantic inferences.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec-5">
  <title>Research Methodology</title>
<p>Research Method</p><p>The existing study has used a descriptive research method. The theme-rheme model of systemic functional linguistics has been used as a theoretical framework. It is said, &quot;Theme involves three major systems: choice of type of theme, choice of marked or unmarked theme, and choice of predicated and not predicated theme” (Eggins, 2004:299). The choice of predicated theme is investigated through both qualitative and quantitative research methods. This study has also applied the framework of thematic progression i.e., simple linear theme, constant theme, split theme, and split rheme (McCabe, 1999). The peripheral themes which do not fit in any of the thematic progression patterns (McCabe, 1999) have also been investigated in this research.</p><p><break/></p><p><break/></p><p>Samples &amp; Corpus Size</p><p>In this research, the unmotivated displacement of predicated themes and its effects on the thematic progression has been analyzed from the English text, Things Fall Apart (Achebe, 1958), containing approximately 50000 words and its Urdu text, Bikharti Duniya (Ullah, 1991) containing 55000 words.</p><p><break/></p><p>Annotation Instrument</p><p>The selected texts were annotated according to the scheme of UAM Corpus Tool (O’Donnell, 2008). Being semi-automatic, the UAM Corpus Tool exports an annotation scheme for the framework of SFL, which served the objectives of the current study. The following scheme shows multiple-level annotation tags.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec-6">
  <title>Figure 1</title>
<p>The Scheme of Predicated Themes</p>
</sec>
<fig id="fig-1"><alt-text>Figure 1</alt-text><caption><title>Figure 1</title></caption><graphic xlink:href="https://gssrjournal.com/8Zaw9IvxHx/Figure 1.jpg"/></fig>
<sec id="sec-7">
  <title>Data Analysis Procedure</title>
<p>This study compiled the data from both English and Urdu texts and developed it into a corpus. The corpus was annotated by assigning only relevant annotations tags to the data in multiple layers. The English data was annotated semi-automatically, while the Urdu data were annotated manually. After annotation, the difference in frequency of the predicated thematic structures was shown in a table. From the annotated corpus, some clauses were taken for further evaluation and discussion. The thematic progression patterns of the predicated thematic structures were also investigated, and their difference in frequency was given in a table. The patterns of thematic progression were shown on the figures to analyze their information flow.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec-8">
  <title>Findings and Discussion</title>
 <p>This study finds significant variations in the
Urdu translation of English predicated thematic structures. The variations
occur due to unmotivated displacements of
the predicated themes. Such displacements not only omit the emphasis and
contrast but also convey misleading information. Due to misleading information,
the reader of the target text misinterprets the author of the source text. This
section discusses nine cases of variations in the English and the Urdu
predicated thematic structures.</p>  <p><bold>Variations in the Urdu Translation
of English Predicated Themes</bold></p> <p>The frequency of the English and the Urdu
predicated themes is investigated as follows.</p> <p><break/></p>  <p><bold>Table 3. </bold>Frequency of Predicated
Thematic Structures</p> <table-wrap id="table3"><label>Table 3</label><caption><title>Table 3</title></caption><table><thead><tr><th valign="top"> <p><bold>Thematic Structures</bold></p> </th><th colspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>English</bold></p> </th><th colspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Urdu</bold></p> </th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="7"> <p>Predicated
  Themes</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>It is/was---who</p> </td><td> <p>6%</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>j?h he/t?h?---?o / ??s ne</p> </td><td> <p>15%</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>It is/was---which</p> </td><td> <p>4%</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>j?h he/t?h?---?o / ??s ke</p> </td><td> <p>6%</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>It is/was---that</p> </td><td> <p>20%</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>j?h he/t?h?---?o</p> </td><td> <p>4%</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>It is/was---where</p> </td><td> <p>2%</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>j?h he/t?h?---??h??</p> </td><td> <p>2%</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>It is/was---when</p> </td><td> <p>3%</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>j?h he/t?h?---??b (??s me?)</p> </td><td> <p>3%</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>It is/was---whom</p> </td><td> <p>0%</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>j?h he/t?h?---??s se</p> </td><td> <p>2%</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>Total Frequency</p> </td><td> <p>35%</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>Total Frequency</p> </td><td> <p>32%</p> </td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap>  <p><break/></p> <p>Analyzing the frequency enlisted in the table
(4), it is observed that some English predicated thematic structures have been
translated into Urdu marked or unmarked ideational themes. So, the English
predicated themes are more frequent than the Urdu predicated themes. But there
is not much difference between the percentage 35% of English predicated themes
and the percentage 32% of Urdu predicated themes. The following examples
selected from the source and the target texts show the unmotivated displacements
of predicated themes in the target text.</p> <p><break/></p>  <p><bold>Table 4. </bold>English Predicated
Theme as Urdu Predicated Theme</p> <table-wrap id="table4"><label>Table 4</label><caption><title>Table 4</title></caption><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="5" valign="top"> <p><bold>English Text</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>CL</bold></p> </td><td colspan="3" valign="top"> <p><bold>Theme</bold></p> </td><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Rheme</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Textual</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Ideational</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Predicated</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>1.1a</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>Mr. Kiaga</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>stood firm</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>1.2a</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>and</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>it was his firmness</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>that saved the young church.</p> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="5" valign="top"> <p><bold>Urdu Text                       </bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>CL</bold></p> </td><td colspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Theme</bold></p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Rheme</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Textual</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Ideational</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Predicated</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>1.1b</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>Mr. Kiaga</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>s?b?t? k?d??m r?h?</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>1.2b</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>??r</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>j?hi ?st??hk?m t?h?</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>??s ne n?? ?mr g?r?e ko ?s v?qt? s?nmbh?l l?j?.</p> </td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap>  <p><break/></p> <p>The
English predicated theme in (1.2a) starts from it-cleft followed by a copular
verb and highlighted element <italic>firmness</italic>. The Urdu predicated theme in
(1.2b) starts from an NP as highlighted element <italic>?</italic><italic>st</italic><italic>??</italic><italic>hk</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>m</italic> ‘firmness’ followed by a
copular verb <italic>t</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>h</italic><italic>?</italic> ‘was’. The former highlighted
element is modified by possessive adjective <italic>his</italic> while the latter is not
modified. Such difference creates ambiguity in defining contrast. The contrast
of English predicated theme specifies a man’s quality e.g. <italic>it was his firmness
</italic>while the contrast of Urdu predicated theme specifies only a quality e.g. <italic>j</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>hi </italic><italic>?</italic><italic>st</italic><italic>??</italic><italic>hk</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>m</italic> ‘this firmness’. The writer emphasizes the firmness of a person in the English
predicated theme (1.2a) while the translator emphasizes only a specific kind of
firmness in the Urdu predicated theme (1.2b). This analysis does not show an
unmotivated displacement of the whole predicated theme. But only possessive
adjective <italic>his</italic> has been displaced and omitted in the Urdu translation.
For this English predicated theme, the possible Urdu translation choices are: <italic>j</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>h </italic><italic>?</italic><italic>ska</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>st</italic><italic>??</italic><italic>hk</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>m hi t</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>h</italic><italic>?</italic>&apos;it was his firmness<italic>,&apos; </italic>or<italic>?</italic><italic>ska</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>st</italic><italic>??</italic><italic>hk</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>m hi t</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>h</italic><italic>?</italic>&apos;his firmness was .&apos;The variation between the predicated themes (1.2a) and (1.2b)
affects thematic progression (cf. Figure 2). The following variation highlights that the English predicated
theme has been translated as a marked ideational theme (see Table 5).</p> <p><break/></p>  <p><bold>Table 5</bold><bold>.</bold>English Predicated Theme as Urdu Marked (Complement)
Ideational Theme</p> <table-wrap id="table5"><label>Table 5</label><caption><title>Table 5</title></caption><table><thead><tr><th rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>CL</bold></p> </th><th colspan="3" valign="top"> <p><bold>Theme</bold></p> </th><th rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Rheme</bold></p> </th></tr><tr><th valign="top"> <p><bold>Textual</bold></p> </th><th valign="top"> <p><bold>Ideational</bold></p> </th><th valign="top"> <p><bold>Predicated</bold></p> </th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td valign="top"> <p>2.1a</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>He</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>was called the Cat</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>2.2a</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>because</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>his back</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>would never touch the earth</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>2.3a</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>and</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>it was this man</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>that Okonkwo threw in a fight.</p> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="5" valign="top"> <p><bold>Urdu Text</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>CL</bold></p> </td><td colspan="3" valign="top"> <p><bold>Theme</bold></p> </td><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Rheme</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Textual</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Ideational</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Predicated</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>2.1b</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>?se</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>b?l? ?s l?je k?h? ??t?? he</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>2.2b</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>ke</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>?sk? pith</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>k?bhi z?min p?r n?hi l?gi t?hi</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>2.3b</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>?s x?s ko</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>Okonkwo ne k??t?i me? ??t? k?j?.</p> </td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap>  <p><break/></p> <p>This
analysis exhibits that the English predicated theme in (2.3a) has been
translated as Urdu marked ideational theme in (2.3b). The Urdu thematic
structure in (2.3b) includes a complement <italic>?</italic><italic>s x</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>s ko</italic> ‘this man’ at clause initial
position. This marked ideational theme displaces the topical theme <italic>Okonkwo</italic>
which does not receive the progression of preceding themes. The translator has
placed complement at thematic prominence in order to highlight it an important
element. But this translation choice is misleading for readers because they
cannot identify the sense of exclusiveness. They may assume that there are also
other men whom Okonkwo has thrown in a fight. The English predicated theme
(2.3a) can have another translation choice e.g. <italic>j</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>hi vo x</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>s he</italic> <italic>??</italic><italic>se Okonkwo ne k</italic><italic>??</italic><italic>t</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>i me? </italic><italic>??</italic><italic>t</italic><italic>?</italic><italic> k</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>j</italic><italic>?</italic>. The translated theme in (2.3b) affects the
mapping of information focus. The English theme in (2.3a) involves thematic
predication in which highlighted element is an information focus. But it is not
found in the Urdu translation. Here both themes deal with constant thematic
progression despite having different information focus (cf. Figure 3). The
absence of predicated theme in the translated Urdu clause is also observed (see
Table 6).</p> <p><break/></p>  <table-wrap id="table6"><label>Table 6</label><caption><title>English Predicated Theme as Urdu Unmarked Ideational Theme</title></caption><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="6" valign="top"> <p><bold>English Text</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>CL</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Adjunct</bold></p> </td><td colspan="3" valign="top"> <p><bold>Theme</bold></p> </td><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Rheme</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Modal</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Textual</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Ideational</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Predicated</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>3.1a</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>Ezinma</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>was an only child</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>3.2a</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>and</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>(she) =elliptical</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>(was) the centre of her mother&apos;s world</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>3.3a</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>very often</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>it was Ezinma</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>who decided what food her mother should
  prepare</p> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="6" valign="top"> <p><bold>Urdu Text</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>CL</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Adjunct</bold></p> </td><td colspan="3" valign="top"> <p><bold>Theme</bold></p> </td><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Rheme</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Modal</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Textual</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Ideational</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Predicated</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>3.1b</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>Ez?nm?</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>?klot?i b??i t?hi</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>3.2b</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>??r</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>(vo) =elliptical</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>?pni m?? ki d??nj? k? m?rk?z (t?hi).</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>3.3b</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>?ks?r</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>Ez?nm?</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>fesl? k?rt?i ke ?s ki m?? kons? kh?n? t??j?r k?re</p> </td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap>  <p><break/></p> <p>This analysis specifies that
the translated Urdu theme in (3.3b) is a simple unmarked ideational theme <italic>Ez</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>nm</italic><italic>?</italic> without
any emphasis. This theme is not contrastive and gives the information that
Ezinma and any other persons can decide for what food to be prepared. On the
contrary, the English predicated theme in (3.3a) signifies that it is only
Ezinma who decides about the food. This difference justifies that English
predicated theme is an information focus but Urdu theme is not an information
focus. To maintain Urdu predicated thematic focus, the English predicated theme
can have an appropriate translation choice e.g. <italic>j</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>h Ezinma hi t</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>hi</italic> ‘It was Ezinma’. However, despite of different
information focus, both the English predicated theme and the Urdu unmarked
ideational theme correspond to their preceding themes and implicate constant
thematic progression (cf. Figure 4). The next analysis shows how the Urdu
translation fails to maintain the information focus, contrast and information
flow (see Table 7).</p> <p><break/></p> <p><bold>Table 7. </bold>English Predicated Theme as
Urdu Unmarked Ideational Theme</p> <table-wrap id="table7"><label>Table 7</label><caption><title>Table 7</title></caption><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="5" valign="top"> <p><bold>English
  Text</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>CL</bold></p> </td><td colspan="3" valign="top"> <p><bold>Theme</bold></p> </td><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Rheme</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Textual</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Ideational</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Predicated</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>4.1a</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>but</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>there</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>was a
  young lad who had been captivated</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>4.2a</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>his
  name</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>was
  Nwoye, Okonkwo&apos;s first son</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>4.3a</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>it was
  not the mad logic of the Trinity</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>that
  captivated him.</p> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="5" valign="top"> <p><bold>Urdu Text</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>CL</bold></p> </td><td colspan="3" valign="top"> <p><bold>Theme</bold></p> </td><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Rheme</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Textual</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Ideational</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Predicated</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>4.1b</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>lek?n</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>v?h??</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>ek n????v?n l??k? es? t?h? ?o ?ske se??r me? ? ??k? t?h?</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>4.2b</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>vo</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>Nwoye,
  Okonkwo k? p?hlothi k? bet? t?h?</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>4.3b</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>t??slis ki m??nun?ni m?nt?q ne</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>?se m?t??s?r n?hi k?j? t?h?.</p> </td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap>  <p><break/></p> <p>The English predicated theme in (4.3a) converts
into the Urdu unmarked ideational theme in (4.3b). Both the English and the
Urdu clauses are negative but they discuss negation in different ways. The
English predicated theme in (4.3a) includes highlighted element that is negated
by the word<italic> not </italic>right after copular verb. It means that a person has not
been captivated by the mad logic of the Trinity but by something else. On the
contrary, the translated Urdu theme conveys merely an information without any
emphasis. The rheme of Urdu clause discusses negation in the sense that the
person has been captivated neither by the mad logic of the Trinity norby
anything else. The translation choice e.g. <italic>j</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>h</italic> <italic>t</italic><italic>??</italic><italic>slis ki m</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>nun</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>ni m</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>nt</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>q nehi t</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>hi </italic><italic>??</italic><italic>s ne </italic><italic>?</italic><italic>se m</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>t</italic><italic>??</italic><italic>s</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>r k</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>j</italic><italic>?</italic>can be selected for the English predicated thematic structure in
(4.3a)<italic>.</italic> Moreover,
the English predicated theme and the Urdu unmarked ideational theme incorporate
different peripheral themes (cf. Figure 5). The succeeding analysis how the
English predicated theme has been translated as the Urdu displaced topical
theme (see Table 8).</p> <p><break/></p>  <table-wrap id="table8"><label>Table 8</label><caption><title>English Predicated Theme as Urdu Displaced Topical Theme</title></caption><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="7" valign="top"> <p><bold>English Text</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>CL</bold></p> </td><td colspan="5" valign="top"> <p><bold>Theme</bold></p> </td><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Rheme</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Textual</bold></p> </td><td colspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Ideational</bold></p> </td><td colspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Predicated</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>5.1a</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>but</p> </td><td colspan="2" valign="top"> <p>there</p> </td><td colspan="2" valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>were many others who saw the situation
  differently</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>5.2a</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>and</p> </td><td colspan="2" valign="top">  </td><td colspan="2" valign="top"> <p>it was their counsel</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>that prevailed in the end.</p> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="7" valign="top"> <p><bold>Urdu Text</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>CL</bold></p> </td><td colspan="5" valign="top"> <p><bold>Theme</bold></p> </td><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Rheme</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Textual</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Adjunct</bold></p> </td><td colspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Ideational</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Displaced</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>5.1b</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>l?k?n</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td colspan="2" valign="top"> <p>v?h?? p?r</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>boh?t? se
  ese bhi t?he ?o sur?t? e h?l ko m?kht??l?f ?nd??z se ??n??t?e t?he</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>5.2b</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>??r</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>?kh?r k?r</p> </td><td colspan="2" valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>?nhi ki r?e</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>s?b p?r ??vi r?hi.</p> </td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap>  <p><break/></p> <p>The
English predicated theme in (5.2a) has been translated as the Urdu displaced
topical theme in (5.2b). The emphatic particle emphasizes displaced theme to
show contrast e.g. <italic>?</italic><italic>nhi ki r</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>e </italic>‘only their opinion not of someone else’ but it
not a predicated theme. The English predicated theme indicates an information
focus while the Urdu displaced theme does not indicate any information focus.
To some extent, both themes deal with linear thematic progression. As the rheme
in (5.1a) shares information with the following English predicated theme.
Similarly, the rheme in (5.1b) shares information with its following Urdu
displaced topical theme. But due to the displaced theme, the adjunct at Urdu
clause initial position also denotes peripheral theme (cf. Figure 6). Moreover,
the Urdu displaced theme has failed to maintain information focus and contrast.
The translation choice e.g. <italic>j</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>h </italic><italic>?</italic><italic>nhi ki r</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>e t</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>hi </italic><italic>?</italic><italic>o s</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>b p</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>r </italic><italic>?</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>vi r</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>hi </italic>‘it was their counsel that
prevailed’can be appropriate for the English predicated thematic
structure in (5.2a)<italic>.</italic> The absence of information focus, contrast and
information flow in the translated Urdu theme is also observed in the next
examples (see Table 9).</p> <p><bold><break/> </bold></p>  <p><bold>Table 9. </bold>English Predicated Theme as
Urdu Rheme</p> <table-wrap id="table9"><label>Table 9</label><caption><title>Table 9</title></caption><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="6" valign="top"> <p><bold>English Text</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>CL</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Adjunct</bold></p> </td><td colspan="3" valign="top"> <p><bold>Theme</bold></p> </td><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Rheme</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Modal</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Ideational</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Predicated</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Displaced</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>6.1a</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>he</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>began to speak, quietly and deliberately,
  picking his words with great care</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>6.2a</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>it is Okonkwo</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>that I primarily wish to speak to</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>6.3a</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>he</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>began</p> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="6" valign="top"> <p><bold>Urdu Text</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>CL</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Adjunct</bold></p> </td><td colspan="3" valign="top"> <p><bold>Theme</bold></p> </td><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Rheme</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Modal</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Ideational</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Predicated</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Displaced</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>6.1b</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>vo</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>?h?st??gi se so? so? k?r ??r b??i e?t??j?t se ?lf?z k? ?nt?eh?b k?rt?e hue
  bolne l?g?</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>6.2b</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>?sne</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>b?t? ??ru ki,</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>6.3b</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>p?hle p?hle t?o</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>me?</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>“Okonkwo se b?t? k?rn? ??ht?? hu?”</p> </td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap>  <p><break/></p> <p>This description reveals that the English
predicated theme in (6.2a) has been translated as the Urdu rheme in (6.3b). The
translated Urdu theme does not include emphasis. The information focus in
English predicated theme is <italic>Okonkwo</italic> which becomes the part of the Urdu
rheme in (6.3b). The English predicated theme shows peripheral theme which is
not found in the Urdu translation (cf. Figure 7). The modal adjunct <italic>primarily</italic>
is placed in the English rheme but the translator has created ambiguity by
placing this modal adjunct at the start of Urdu clause. The whole Urdu clause
conveys misleading information. The suitable translation choice e.g. <italic>Okonkwo
hi he </italic><italic>??</italic><italic>s se </italic><italic>me? </italic><italic>p</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>hle</italic><italic>b</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>t</italic><italic>?</italic><italic> k</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>rn</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>??</italic><italic>ht</italic><italic>??</italic><italic> hu? </italic>can be used to avoid ambiguity. This analysis shows how the
translator has translated and shifted the English predicated theme into the
Urdu rheme. He has also shifted the adjunct in English rheme at Urdu clause
initial position. Moreover, the pronoun <italic>I</italic> in the English rheme has been
translated as the Urdu displaced theme. The information focus and contrast of
the translated Urdu theme are also different (see Table 10).</p> <p><break/></p> <p><bold>Table 10.</bold> English Predicated Theme as
Urdu Marked (Adjunct) Ideational Theme</p> <table-wrap id="table10"><label>Table 10</label><caption><title>Table 10</title></caption><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="5" valign="top"> <p><bold>English Text</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>CL</bold></p> </td><td colspan="3" valign="top"> <p><bold>Theme</bold></p> </td><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Rheme</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Textual</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Ideational</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Predicated</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>7.1a</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>when</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>the men</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>were left alone</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>7.2a</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>they</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>found no words to speak to one another</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>7.3a</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>it was only on the third day</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>when they could no longer bear the hunger and
  the insults,</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>7.4a</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>that</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>they</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>began to talk about giving in</p> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="5" valign="top"> <p><bold>Urdu Text</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>CL</bold></p> </td><td colspan="3" valign="top"> <p><bold>Theme</bold></p> </td><td rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Rheme</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Textual</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Ideational</bold></p> </td><td valign="top"> <p><bold>Predicated</bold></p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>7.1b</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>??b</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>vo log</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>t??nh? hot?e</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>7.2b</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>t??b bhi</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>?nko</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>?p?s me? g?ft??gu ke l?je ?lf?z n? m?lt?e</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>7.3b</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>t??sre d?n ?? k?r</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>??b ?n me? bhuk
  ??r be?z?ti b?rd???t? k?rne k? m?zid? j?r? n? r?h?</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>7.4b</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>t?o</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>?nho? ne</p> </td><td valign="top">  </td><td valign="top"> <p>h?r m?n?ne ke
  b?re me? b?t?e? ??ru ki?</p> </td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap>  <p><break/></p><p>The
English predicated theme in (7.3a) is the composition of it-cleft, copular verb
and adverbial phrase. The translated Urdu theme in (7.3b) is marked ideational
theme without emphasis. The Urdu theme <italic>t</italic><italic>??</italic><italic>sr</italic><italic>e d</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>n </italic><italic>??</italic><italic> k</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>r </italic>‘on the third day’ means that they tried to talk on first and
second days as well and now on the third day they began to talk. On the
contrary, the English predicated theme carrying emphasis means that not on any
other day but only on third day, they began to talk. The absence of emphasis has
affected the meanings and information flow of the translated Urdu theme. The
English predicated theme and the Urdu marked ideational theme are placed as
peripheral themes (cf. Figure 8). The translation choice e.g. <italic>j</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>h s</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>rf t</italic><italic>??</italic><italic>sr</italic><italic>?</italic><italic> hi d</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>n t</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>h</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>??</italic><italic>b </italic><italic>?</italic><italic>n me?
bhuk </italic><italic>??</italic><italic>r be</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>z</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>ti b</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>rd</italic><italic>???</italic><italic>t</italic><italic>?</italic><italic> k</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>rne k</italic><italic>?</italic><italic> m</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>zid</italic><italic>?</italic><italic> j</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>r</italic><italic>?</italic><italic> n</italic><italic>?</italic><italic> r</italic><italic>?</italic><italic>h</italic><italic>?</italic> can have an appropriate information focus and
contrast<italic>.</italic></p><p>The
following section analyzes the effects of</p><p>unmotivated displacements of translated themes
on thematic progression.</p><p><bold>Thematic Progression in English and Urdu</bold></p><p>The information structure of marked predicated
themes is defined by the thematic progression patterns (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="file:///D:/Fulltext/GSSR/2021/Fall/14%20A%20Contrastive%20Analysis%20of%20Predicated%20Thematic%20Structures%20-%20Humaira%20Yaqub.docx#Munday">McCabe, 1999</ext-link>). This study identifies the
thematic progression patterns of predicated themes in the English text and its
Urdu translation. In this section, the figures highlight seven English
predicated themes and their Urdu translation. There is observed unmotivated
displacements of the translated Urdu themes. In some cases, the unmotivated
displacements of themes have affected thematic progression. But in other cases,
such displacements have not affected thematic progression and maintain
information flow. The frequency of the thematic patterns has been observed in
the following table.</p> <p><bold>Table 11. </bold>Thematic Progression of the Predicated
Themes</p> <table-wrap id="table11"><label>Table 11</label><caption><title>Table 11</title></caption><table><thead><tr><th colspan="2" rowspan="2" valign="top"> <p><bold>Thematic Structures</bold></p> </th><th colspan="4"> <p><bold>Thematic Progression</bold></p> </th><th rowspan="2"> <p><bold>Peripheral Theme</bold></p> </th></tr><tr><th> <p><bold>Linear
   Theme</bold></p> </th><th> <p><bold>Constant
   Theme</bold></p> </th><th> <p><bold>Split
   Theme</bold></p> </th><th> <p><bold>Split
   Rheme</bold></p> </th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td valign="top"> <p>English</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>Predicated Themes</p> </td><td> <p>12%</p> </td><td> <p>8%</p> </td><td> <p>0%</p> </td><td> <p>0%</p> </td><td> <p>13%</p> </td></tr><tr><td valign="top"> <p>Urdu</p> </td><td valign="top"> <p>Predicated Themes</p> </td><td> <p>10%</p> </td><td> <p>7%</p> </td><td> <p>0%</p> </td><td> <p>0%</p> </td><td> <p>13%</p> </td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap>  <p><break/></p><p>The
thematic progression of both English and Urdu predicated themes is equal to a
greater extent. In both source and target texts, the predicated themes are
mostly observed at periphery position. The linear themes are more than the
constant themes. Consider the following figures showing thematic progression.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec-9">
  <title>Figure 2</title>
<p>Predicated Theme with Linear and Constant Thematic Progression</p>
</sec>
<fig id="fig-2"><alt-text>Figure 2</alt-text><caption><title>Figure 2</title></caption><graphic xlink:href="https://gssrjournal.com/8Zaw9IvxHx/Figure 2.jpg"/></fig>
<sec id="sec-10">
<p>This figure indicates a combination of linear and constant thematic progression in the English predicated theme. Such combination of two main patterns of thematic progression is unique. The translated predicated theme contains only linear thematic progression. In English predicated theme, the possessive adjective his connects to the preceding theme Mr. Kiaga and maintains a constant information flow. The nominal firmness connects to its preceding rheme firm and maintains linear information flow. In the Urdu predicated theme, the possessive adjective is omitted and only the nominal ?st??hk?m ‘firmness’ connects to the preceding rheme s?b?t? k?d??m ‘firm’ and maintains linear thematic progression. This variation in Urdu translation of predicated theme affects information focus, contrast and information flow. But the variation in Urdu translation has no effect on information flow in the following analysis.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec-11">
  <title>Figure 3</title>
<p>Constant Progression in English Predicated and Urdu Marked Ideational Themes</p>
</sec>
<fig id="fig-3"><alt-text>Figure 3</alt-text><caption><title>Figure 3</title></caption><graphic xlink:href="https://gssrjournal.com/8Zaw9IvxHx/Figure 3.jpg"/></fig>
<sec id="sec-12">
<p>This figure shows that the English and the Urdu predicated themes contains constant thematic progression. The English predicated theme this man and the translated Urdu theme ?s x?s ‘this man’ receive information from the preceding themes i.e. pronominal and possessive adjective. The translated Urdu theme maintains the identical thematic progression but being a complement ideational theme, it loses information focus and contrast. The constant thematic progression is also observed in the following analysis.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec-13">
  <title>Figure 4</title>
<p>Constant Thematic Progression in English Predicated and Urdu Unmarked Ideational Themes</p>
</sec>
<fig id="fig-4"><alt-text>Figure 4</alt-text><caption><title>Figure 4</title></caption><graphic xlink:href="https://gssrjournal.com/8Zaw9IvxHx/Figure 4.jpg"/></fig>
<sec id="sec-14">
<p>This figure highlights that the English predicated theme and the translated Urdu theme receive information from the preceding theme T1 and maintain constant thematic progression. The translated Urdu theme is an unmarked ideational theme so, it fails to maintain the information focus and contrast. The next Urdu translation fails to maintain not only information focus and contrast but also information flow.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec-15">
  <title>Figure 5</title>
<p>English Predicated and Urdu Unmarked Ideational Themes as Peripheral Themes</p>
</sec>
<fig id="fig-5"><alt-text>Figure 5</alt-text><caption><title>Figure 5</title></caption><graphic xlink:href="https://gssrjournal.com/8Zaw9IvxHx/Figure 5.jpg"/></fig>
<sec id="sec-16">
<p>This figure shows no thematic progression in the English predicated theme and the translated Urdu theme. Both themes are located at periphery position. The translated Urdu theme is an unmarked ideational theme which loses information focus and contrast of English predicated theme. The next English predicated theme consists of two types of thematic progression.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec-17">
  <title>Figure 6</title>
<p>Linear Thematic Progression in English Predicated and Urdu Displaced Topical Themes</p>
</sec>
<fig id="fig-6"><alt-text>Figure 6</alt-text><caption><title>Figure 6</title></caption><graphic xlink:href="https://gssrjournal.com/8Zaw9IvxHx/Figure 6.jpg"/></fig>
<sec id="sec-18">
<p>This figure shows that the English predicated theme and the translated Urdu theme have linear thematic progression. Besides, the English predicated theme and the translated Urdu theme are also located at periphery position. There is also accommodated an extra adjunct at periphery position. Moreover, the Urdu translated theme is a displaced theme so, it does not maintain information focus and contrast. The following analysis shows that the English and the Urdu themes have different patterns of thematic progression.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec-19">
  <title>Figure 7</title>
<p>Peripheral Theme in English and Constant Thematic Progression in Urdu</p>
</sec>
<fig id="fig-7"><alt-text>Figure 7</alt-text><caption><title>Figure 7</title></caption><graphic xlink:href="https://gssrjournal.com/8Zaw9IvxHx/Figure 7.jpg"/></fig>
<sec id="sec-20">
<p>This figure indicates that the English predicated theme has been translated as Urdu rheme Okonkwo. This unmotivated displacement of the translated Urdu theme affects thematic progression and causes misleading information. In this figure, the Urdu theme T1 continues to be selected as the Urdu theme T2 showing constant thematic progression. But the English predicated theme T2 is placed at periphery position and does not connects its information to the preceding theme. Due to these variations, the Urdu translation fails to maintain information focus, contrast and information flow. In the next analysis, the English predicated theme and the translated Urdu theme T2 are located at periphery position.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec-21">
  <title>Figure 8</title>
<p>English Predicated and Urdu Marked Ideational Themes as Peripheral Themes</p>
</sec>
<fig id="fig-8"><alt-text>Figure 8</alt-text><caption><title>Figure 8</title></caption><graphic xlink:href="https://gssrjournal.com/8Zaw9IvxHx/Figure 8.jpg"/></fig>
<sec id="sec-22">
<p>This figure shows that the English predicated theme translated as the Urdu marked ideational theme can have identical information flow but cannot have identical information focus and contrast. The English predicated theme and the translated Urdu theme T2 are placed as peripheral themes. But the information of R2 flows down in the theme T3showing linear thematic progression. In this analysis, the unmotivated displacement of the translated Urdu theme does not affect information flow.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec-23">
  <title>Conclusion</title>
<p>This study has addressed the research questions by analyzing the Urdu translation of English predicated thematic structures and their thematic progression. Through the contrastive analysis of both texts, it is concluded that the author of English text incorporates the predicated theme to emphasize the most important and certain aspects of information. The translator of Urdu text also applies emphasis on the most required information but mostly he has used ambiguous and misleading translation choices. Most of the English predicated themes are not translated as the Urdu predicated themes. It is also concluded that the Urdu translation shows some unmotivated displacements of themes. Due to the unmotivated displacements, the translated Urdu themes are unable to preserve the information focus and contrast. The unmotivated displacements of the translated Urdu themes have also affected thematic progression. The predicated theme is always a marked theme carrying new information (Halliday 1985). But this study finds that besides the new information, the marked predicated theme also carries constant and linear thematic progression.</p><p>This study has found the following variations in the Urdu translation of the English predicated themes. Firstly, some English predicated themes have been translated as Urdu predicated themes with different information focus, contrast and thematic progression. Secondly, some English predicated themes have been translated as Urdu marked (complement or adjunct) ideational themes with different information focus and contrast but with similar thematic progression. Thirdly, some English predicated themes have been translated as Urdu unmarked ideational themes with different information focus and contrast but with similar thematic progression. Lastly, some English predicated themes have been translated as the rhemes of Urdu clauses with different information focus, contrast and information flow. Analyzing these variations, the researcher has suggested the appropriate translations choices according to the Urdu predicative formula. This study suggests that the translators of the target texts should be careful in translating the thematic structures of the source texts.</p>
</sec>
</body>
<back>
<fn-group content-type="conflict-of-interest">
  <title>Conflict of Interest</title>
  <fn fn-type="conflict">
<p>The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.</p>
  </fn>
</fn-group>
<fn-group content-type="ethics-statement">
  <title>Ethics Statement</title>
  <fn fn-type="ethics">
<p>This study did not require formal ethics approval.</p>
  </fn>
</fn-group>
<fn-group content-type="data-availability">
  <title>Data Availability</title>
  <fn fn-type="data-availability-statement">
<p>Data sharing is not applicable to this article.</p>
  </fn>
</fn-group>
<app-group>
  <app id="app-suppl">
    <title>Supplementary Materials</title>
<supplementary-material id="suppl-pdf" content-type="pdf" xlink:href="https://gssrjournal.com/pdf/gssr/8Zaw9IvxHx.pdf">
  <label>PDF</label>
  <caption>
    <title>Full Text PDF</title>
  </caption>
</supplementary-material>
  </app>
</app-group>
<ref-list>
  <title>References</title>
<ref id="Achebe">
  <label>1</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Achebe, C</person-group>
    <year>1958</year>
    <article-title>. Things fall apart</article-title>
    <source>London: Heinemann</source>
    Achebe, C. (1958). Things fall apart. London: Heinemann.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Baker">
  <label>2</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Baker, M</person-group>
    <year>1992</year>
    <article-title>. In other words: A coursebook on translation</article-title>
    <source>London: Routledge</source>
    Baker, M. (1992). In other words: A coursebook on translation. London: Routledge.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Butt">
  <label>3</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Butt, D. et al</person-group>
    <year>2000</year>
    <article-title>. Using functional grammar: An explorer&apos;s guide</article-title>
    <source>Sydney: Macquarie University</source>
    Butt, D. et al. (2000). Using functional grammar: An explorer&apos;s guide. Sydney: Macquarie University
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Collins">
  <label>6</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Collins, P</person-group>
    <year>1991</year>
    <article-title>. Cleft and pseudo-cleft constructions in English</article-title>
    <source>London: Routledge</source>
    <page-range>seudo-cleft</page-range>
    Collins, P. (1991). Cleft and pseudo-cleft constructions in English. London: Routledge.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Danes">
  <label>7</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Danes, F</person-group>
    <year>1974</year>
    <article-title>. Functional sentence perspective and the organization of the text</article-title>
    <source>In Frantisek Danes (ed.), Papers on functional sentence perspective. 106-128. Prague: Academia /The Hague: Mouton</source>
    <page-range>erspective</page-range>
    Danes, F. (1974). Functional sentence perspective and the organization of the text. In Frantisek Danes (ed.), Papers on functional sentence perspective. 106-128. Prague: Academia /The Hague: Mouton.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Downing">
  <label>8</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Downing, A</person-group>
    <year>2001</year>
    <article-title>. The theme-topic interface: Evidence from English</article-title>
    <source>Amsterdam:Lohnnswert</source>
    Downing, A. (2001). The theme-topic interface: Evidence from English. Amsterdam:Lohnnswert.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Eggins">
  <label>9</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Eggins, S</person-group>
    <year>2004</year>
    <article-title>. An introduction to systemic functional linguistics</article-title>
    <source>New York: Continuum</source>
    Eggins, S. (2004). An introduction to systemic functional linguistics. New York: Continuum
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Erdmann">
  <label>10</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Erdmann, P</person-group>
    <year>1990</year>
    <article-title>. Discourse and grammar: Focussing and defocussing in English</article-title>
    <source>Tiibingen: Newmeyer</source>
    Erdmann, P. (1990). Discourse and grammar: Focussing and defocussing in English. Tiibingen: Newmeyer.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Grabe">
  <label>11</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Grabe, W., &amp; Kaplan, R. B</person-group>
    <year>1996</year>
    <article-title>. Theory of practice of writing: An appliedlinguistic perspective</article-title>
    <source>Harlow: Pearson Education</source>
    <page-range>ractice</page-range>
    Grabe, W., &amp; Kaplan, R. B. (1996). Theory of practice of writing: An appliedlinguistic perspective. Harlow: Pearson Education.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Halliday">
  <label>12</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Halliday, M</person-group>
    <year>1967</year>
    <article-title>. Notes on transitivity and theme in English</article-title>
    <source>Journal of Linguistics 3.199-244</source>
    Halliday, M. (1967). Notes on transitivity and theme in English. Journal of Linguistics 3.199-244.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Hasan">
  <label>16</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Hasan, R</person-group>
    <year>1984</year>
    <article-title>. Ways of saying, ways of meaning</article-title>
    <source>In Robin P. Fawcett, Michael Halliday, Sydney Lamb &amp; Adam Makkai (eds.), The semiotics of language andculture volume1: Language as social semiotic. London: Francis Pinter</source>
    <page-range>Fawcett</page-range>
    Hasan, R. (1984). Ways of saying, ways of meaning. In Robin P. Fawcett, Michael Halliday, Sydney Lamb &amp; Adam Makkai (eds.), The semiotics of language andculture volume1: Language as social semiotic. London: Francis Pinter
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Huddleston">
  <label>17</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Huddleston, R</person-group>
    <year>1984</year>
    <article-title>. Introduction to the grammar of English</article-title>
    <source>Cambridge: Cambridge University Press</source>
    <page-range>ress</page-range>
    Huddleston, R. (1984). Introduction to the grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Johansson">
  <label>18</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Johansson, M</person-group>
    <year>2002</year>
    <article-title>. Clefts in contrast: A contrastive study of it clefts and wh clefts in English and Swedish texts and translations</article-title>
    <source>Linguistics</source>
    <volume>39</volume>
    <issue>3</issue>
    <fpage>547</fpage>
    <lpage>582</lpage>
    Johansson, M. (2002). Clefts in contrast: A contrastive study of it clefts and wh clefts in English and Swedish texts and translations. Linguistics 39(3), 547-582.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Katz">
  <label>19</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Katz, S</person-group>
    <year>2000</year>
    <article-title>. A functional approach to the teaching of the French c&apos;est-cleft</article-title>
    <source>French Review</source>
    Katz, S. (2000). A functional approach to the teaching of the French c&apos;est-cleft. French Review 74, 248-262.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Kuswoyo">
  <label>20</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Kuswoyo, H</person-group>
    <year>2016</year>
    <article-title>. Thematic structure in Barack Obama&apos;s press conference: A systemic functional grammar study</article-title>
    <source>Advances in Language and Literary Studies</source>
    <page-range>ress</page-range>
    Kuswoyo, H. (2016). Thematic structure in Barack Obama&apos;s press conference: A systemic functional grammar study. Advances in Language and Literary Studies 7(2). Australian International Academic Centre, Australia.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Lavid">
  <label>21</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Lavid, J</person-group>
    <year>2010</year>
    <article-title>. Contrasting choices in clause- initial position in English and Spanish: Acorpus-based analysis</article-title>
    <source>In Elizabeth Swain (ed.), Thresholds and potentialities ofsystemic functional linguistics: Multilingual, multimodal and other specializeddis courses. 49-68. Trieste: EUT</source>
    <page-range>osition</page-range>
    Lavid, J. (2010). Contrasting choices in clause- initial position in English and Spanish: Acorpus-based analysis. In Elizabeth Swain (ed.), Thresholds and potentialities ofsystemic functional linguistics: Multilingual, multimodal and other specializeddis courses. 49-68. Trieste: EUT
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="McCabe">
  <label>24</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">McCabe, A</person-group>
    <year>1999</year>
    <article-title>. Theme and thematic patterns in Spanish and English history text</article-title>
    <source>England: Aston University PhD dissertation</source>
    <page-range>atterns</page-range>
    McCabe, A. (1999). Theme and thematic patterns in Spanish and English history text. England: Aston University PhD dissertation
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Munday">
  <label>26</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Munday, J</person-group>
    <year>1998</year>
    <article-title>. Problems of applying thematic analysis to translation between Spanish and English</article-title>
    <source>Cadernos de traduÃ§Ã£o</source>
    <volume>1</volume>
    <issue>3</issue>
    <fpage>183</fpage>
    <lpage>213</lpage>
    Munday, J. (1998). Problems of applying thematic analysis to translation between Spanish and English. Cadernos de traduÃ§Ã£o 1(3), 183-213.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ODonnell">
  <label>28</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">O&apos;Donnell, M</person-group>
    <year>2008</year>
    <article-title>. Demonstration of the UAM Corpus Tool for text and image annotation</article-title>
    <source>Proceedings of the ACL-08: HLT Demo Session (Companion Volume), 13-16.Association for Computational Linguistics</source>
    <page-range>roceedings</page-range>
    O&apos;Donnell, M. (2008). Demonstration of the UAM Corpus Tool for text and image annotation. Proceedings of the ACL-08: HLT Demo Session (Companion Volume), 13-16.Association for Computational Linguistics.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="ref-29">
  <label>29</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">PÃ©ry-Woodley, M. P</person-group>
    <year>1989</year>
    <article-title>. Textual designs: Signalling coherence in First and Second language academic writing</article-title>
    <source>Doctoral thesis. University of Lancaster</source>
    PÃ©ry-Woodley, M. P. (1989). Textual designs: Signalling coherence in First and Second language academic writing. Doctoral thesis. University of Lancaster.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Prince">
  <label>30</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Prince, E</person-group>
    <year>1978</year>
    <article-title>. A comparison of wh-clefts and it-clefts in discourse</article-title>
    <source>Language 54. 883-906</source>
    <page-range>rince</page-range>
    Prince, E. (1978). A comparison of wh-clefts and it-clefts in discourse. Language 54. 883-906.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Raza">
  <label>31</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Raza, G., &amp; Ahmed, T</person-group>
    <year>2011</year>
    <article-title>. Argument scrambling within Urdu NPs</article-title>
    <source>In Miriam Butt &amp; Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG 11 conference. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. 461-481</source>
    <page-range>roceedings</page-range>
    Raza, G., &amp; Ahmed, T. (2011). Argument scrambling within Urdu NPs. In Miriam Butt &amp; Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG 11 conference. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. 461-481.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Riaz">
  <label>32</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Riaz, S</person-group>
    <year>2018</year>
    <article-title>. A stylistic analysis of Manto&apos;s Urdu short stories and their English translations</article-title>
    <source>England: The University of Leeds dissertation</source>
    Riaz, S. (2018). A stylistic analysis of Manto&apos;s Urdu short stories and their English translations. England: The University of Leeds dissertation.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Sade">
  <label>33</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Sade, O. C</person-group>
    <year>2007</year>
    <article-title>. Thematic progression in Christian written discourse in Nigeria</article-title>
    <source>Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences</source>
    <volume>4</volume>
    <issue>1</issue>
    <fpage>64</fpage>
    Sade, O. C. (2007). Thematic progression in Christian written discourse in Nigeria. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences 4(1), 64- 68.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Sari">
  <label>34</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Sari, P</person-group>
    <year>2009</year>
    <article-title>. Theme in the English declarative clause</article-title>
    <source>Unpublished dissertation. Bandung: Universitas Padjadjaran</source>
    <page-range>adjadjaran</page-range>
    Sari, P. (2009). Theme in the English declarative clause. Unpublished dissertation. Bandung: Universitas Padjadjaran.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Schmidt">
  <label>35</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Schmidt, R. L</person-group>
    <year>1999</year>
    <article-title>. Urdu: An essential grammar</article-title>
    <source>London: Routledge</source>
    Schmidt, R. L. (1999). Urdu: An essential grammar. London: Routledge.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Sujatna">
  <label>36</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Sujatna, E. T. S</person-group>
    <year>2013</year>
    <article-title>. Thematic progression of the Sundanese female writers</article-title>
    <source>International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World</source>
    <volume>4</volume>
    <issue>4</issue>
    <fpage>382</fpage>
    <lpage>389</lpage>
    Sujatna, E. T. S. (2013). Thematic progression of the Sundanese female writers. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World 4(4), 382-389
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Taboada">
  <label>37</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Taboada, M</person-group>
    <year>1995</year>
    <article-title>. Theme markedness in English and Spanish: A systemic functional approach</article-title>
    <source>MA thesis. Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain</source>
    Taboada, M. (1995). Theme markedness in English and Spanish: A systemic functional approach. MA thesis. Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Tahir">
  <label>38</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Tahir, S</person-group>
    <year>2019</year>
    <article-title>. Exploring syntactic variations in Urdu and English languages by using systemic functional grammar</article-title>
    <source>Bahawalpur: The Islamia University of Bahawalpur M. Phil. thesis</source>
    <page-range>hil</page-range>
    Tahir, S. (2019). Exploring syntactic variations in Urdu and English languages by using systemic functional grammar. Bahawalpur: The Islamia University of Bahawalpur M. Phil. thesis.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Thompson">
  <label>39</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Thompson, G</person-group>
    <year>1996</year>
    <article-title>. Introducing functional grammar</article-title>
    <source>London: Arnold</source>
    Thompson, G. (1996). Introducing functional grammar. London: Arnold.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Ullah">
  <label>40</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Ullah, I</person-group>
    <year>1991</year>
    <article-title>. Bikharti duniya [Things fall apart]</article-title>
    <source>Lahore: Nigarshat Publications</source>
    <page-range>ublications</page-range>
    Ullah, I. (1991). Bikharti duniya [Things fall apart]. Lahore: Nigarshat Publications.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Van">
  <label>41</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Van Huffel, J</person-group>
    <year>2007</year>
    <article-title>. The Hallidayan notion of theme in original and translated fiction texts in English and Dutch</article-title>
    <source>Unpublished PhD Thesis, Universiteit Gent</source>
    <page-range>hD</page-range>
    Van Huffel, J. (2007). The Hallidayan notion of theme in original and translated fiction texts in English and Dutch. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Universiteit Gent
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Yaqub">
  <label>42</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Yaqub, H., Azhar, M., &amp; Kakepoto, I</person-group>
    <year>2017</year>
    <article-title>. The material clause system in English and Urdu texts: A corpus-based analysis of ideational metafunction</article-title>
    <source>ELF Annual Research Journal</source>
    Yaqub, H., Azhar, M., &amp; Kakepoto, I. (2017). The material clause system in English and Urdu texts: A corpus-based analysis of ideational metafunction. ELF Annual Research Journal 19, 97-118.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="Young">
  <label>44</label>
  <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
    <person-group person-group-type="author">Young, D</person-group>
    <year>1980</year>
    <article-title>. The structure of English clauses</article-title>
    <source>London: Hutchinson</source>
    Young, D. (1980). The structure of English clauses. London: Hutchinson.
  </mixed-citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>