Foreword

Corpus linguistics em erged in the 1960s，and it has been applied to the translation studies since the 1990s.Researches show that the translated texts demonstrate the features of explicitness，sim plification and normalization.Besides，they have a lower lexical density，a shorter mean sentence length，and a higher proportion of high-frequency words.

Based on the comparable tourism texts corpus（CTTC for short），the book attempts to explore the lexical，grammatical，textual，pragmatic and stylistic features of tourism texts and expects to provide some suggestions for the translation of tourism promotional texts from Chinese to English.The listed beloware themajor findings：

In contrast with the original English tourism texts（OETT），the translated English tourism texts（TETT）show the features such as lower STTR，shorter WL，longer SL and more repetition of HFW，which com firms the translation hypotheses of simplification and explicitness.

By analyzing keywords，OETT shows the crafted wording in using temporal expressions；TETT reveals the overuse of pronominal anaphors.The frequent use of the expressions like“you”，“visitors”，“guests”makes OETT more conversational and appealing to the readers；the excessive use of“we”，“he”suggests TETT is rather solid in style.

The POS analysis shows TETT has a lower lexical density.Specifically，the functional words such as AUX，PREP，CONJ and PRON occur more frequently in TETT.However，the words such as VERB，ADV and DET（used before nouns）occurmore often in OETT，im plying there are more contentwords in OETT.(https://www.daowen.com)

By the factor analysis and the principal com ponent analysis，themain 36 variables can be reduced to four principal com ponents.TETT is characterized by longer sentences，fewer types，over-description and third-person point of view.By contrast，OETT has the features such as shorter sentences，diversified words and second-person perspective.

TETT has an absolute priority in c luster quantity，but is rather limited in variety.Emphasizing on background，location and description，TETT presents an expository pattern of“background—description”.Highlighting evaluation and suggestion，OETT shows an instructive pattern of“evaluation—suggestion”.

By the RANGEanalysis，the tourism promotional texts are proved to be colloquial.The evidence of a lower coverage of GLS／AWL and a higher coverage of BNC proves OETT is inc lined to be more readable than TETT.

Overall，English tourism texts tend to be informal in style.OETT is more vivid，vocative and receiver-focused with plenty of suggestive statements；being tedious and far away from readers，TETT should im prove its pragm atic function.