6.1 Mindings of the Study
The previous study has show n som e lexical，gramm atical，textual，pragmatic and stylistic features of tourism texts.Firstly，TETT shows the features such as a lower STTR，shorter WL，longer SL，more repetition of HFW，which confirms the translation hypotheses of sim plification and explicitness.
Second ly，by analyzing keywords，OETT shows idiom aticity in temporal expressions；TETT reveals the overuse of pronominal anaphors.The expressions like you，visitors，guests make OETT more conversational and appealing to the readers；the excessive use of we，he suggests TETT is rather solid in style.
Thirdly，the POS analysis shows TETT has a lower lexical density.Specifically，ADJ，AUX，PREP，CONJand PRON occurm ore frequently in TETT；VERB，ADV and DET occurmore often in OETT.The overuse of prepositions，conjunctions and pronouns in TETT proves the translation hypothesis of normalization.
Fourthly，the factor analysis of SPSS reduces themain 36 variables to four principal com ponents which reaffirms the features of tourism texts.TETT is characterized by longer sentences，less words，overdescription and third-person point of view.By contrast，OETT has the features such as shorter sentences，diversified words and second-person perspective.(https://www.daowen.com)
Fifthly，emphasized on background，location and description，the clusters in TETT present an expository pattern of“background—description”.Highlighting evaluation and suggestion，the clusters in OETT showan instructive pattern of“evaluation—suggestion”.
Lastly，the tourism promotional texts are proved to be colloquial through the RANGEanalysis.The evidence of a lower coverage of GLS／AW Land a higher coverage of BNC proves OETT is inclined to bemore readable than TETT.
Overall，tourism texts tend to be informal in style.Being vivid and receiver-focused，OETT has wellmet the requirements of vocative texts with plenty of suggestive statements；being tedious and far away from readers，TETT should im prove its pragmatic function.