在許多譯文相關的研究中，經常探討譯者翻譯的方法與目的，或者是針對譯文提出翻譯的建議及評價，大多是以較為主觀的方式進行研究，而本研究將以客觀的方式研究文本的「正式度」。
「正式度」一詞很少被大家所討論，一般時候常常討論到譯文的用法正不正式，而不會特別獨立這個辭彙出來探討，而談到譯文正式度通常又與文本的類型有關，當文本的類型越正式，所期待的正式度也越高，而正式文本如軍事相關文件應當具有較高的正式度，但是相關的研究卻非常少，因此本研究將以語料庫的方式分析中華民國四年期國防總檢討譯文的正式度。
本論文收集我國與美國所有的四年期國防總檢討，藉由測量文本正式度的F-measure、可讀性指標Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level以及其他與正式度相關的語言特徵分析我國的譯文正式度是否符合預期的標準，以及是否需要針對受眾進行相關調整，藉此讓未來軍事相關譯文能更貼近翻譯的目的。

In many translation-related studies, the focus is often on exploring the methods and purposes of translators or providing suggestions and evaluations for translations. These studies are mostly conducted in a subjective manner. However, this research aims to study the "formality" of the text in an objective way.
The term "formality" is rarely discussed by people in general. Typically, discussions revolve around whether a translation is formal or informal, without specifically examining this aspect independently. When it comes to the formality of translations, it is often related to the type of text. The more formal the text type, the higher the expected level of formality. For instance, formal texts such as military-related documents are expected to have a higher degree of formality. However, there is a scarcity of research in this area. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the formality of translations in the corpus of the Quadrennial Defense Review of ROC.
This thesis includes all the QDRs from ROC and the United States. By measuring the formality of the texts using F-measure, readability indicators such as Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, and analyzing other language features related to formality, it will determine whether the formality of our translations meet the expected standards and whether they need to be adjusted for the audience. The goal is to bring military-related translations closer to their intended purposes in the future.

國防部（2021年3月25日）。中華民國110年《四年期國防總檢討》專案報告。立法院議案整合暨綜合查詢系統。取自https://misq.ly.gov.tw/MISQ/docu/MISQ3006/uploadFiles/2021031914/62325264191030440000.pdf
陳文政（2013）。檢討「四年期國防總檢討」：從政軍關係的角度。台灣新社會智庫。取自http://www.taiwansig.tw/index.php/%E6%94%BF%E7%AD%96%E5%A0%B1%E5%91%8A/%E6%86%B2%E6%94%BF%E6%B3%95%E5%88%B6/5078-%E6%AA%A2%E8%A8%8E%E3%80%8C%E5%9B%9B%E5%B9%B4%E6%9C%9F%E5%9C%8B%E9%98%B2%E7%B8%BD%E6%AA%A2%E8%A8%8E%E3%80%8D%EF%BC%9A%E5%BE%9E%E6%94%BF%E8%BB%8D%E9%97%9C%E4%BF%82%E7%9A%84%E8%A7%92%E5%BA%A6
陳以琳（2015）。關務宣導品中譯英錯誤分析—以財政部關務署臺北關為例（碩士論文）。輔仁大學。
徐詩媛、白鎧誌、郭伯臣與邱毓芳（2013）。英文文本詞彙多樣性自動化指標發展與探討。TANET2013臺灣網際網路研討會—【論文集】。取自https://www.tcrc.edu.tw/TANET2013/paper/H13-966-1.pdf
黃坤銘（2019）。《國防譯粹》的翻譯策略研究（碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
黃俐璇（2010）。中華民國總統就職演說辭英譯之說服性標記翻譯規範（碩士論文）。長榮大學。
蘇上誠（2021）。108年國防報告書英譯本翻譯策略初探：由紐馬克翻譯理論出發（碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
蘇柏嘉（2021）。政府報告可比語料庫之研究與提升中譯英翻譯能力之意涵（碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
謝奕旭（2002） 從美國QDR論我國國防政策之制定。復興崗學報，76，89-112。
Álvaro, N. V., アルバロネ. グ., & Gradillas, Á. N. (2016). Analysis of the Formality of Text and its Impact on Pharmacovigilance Systems. [Doctoral dissertation] Department of Informatics School of Multidisciplinary Sciences SOKENDAI.
Arnaud, Pierre J. L. (1984). The Lexical Richness of L2 Written Productions and the Validity of Vocabulary Tests. ERIC Clearinghouse publishing. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED275164
August, T., & Reinecke, K. (2019, May 4-9). Pay Attention, Please: Formal Language Improves Attention in Volunteer and Paid Online Experiments [Paper presentation]. CM Press the 2019 CHI Conference, Glasgow, Scotland, UK. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300478
Biber, D. (1988). Variation Across Speech and Writing. Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D. (1999). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Pearson Education ESL.
Bloom D.A. (2000). Acronyms, abbreviations and initialisms., 86(1), 1-6. doi:10.1046/j.1464-410x.2000.00717.x
Carroll, J. M. (1938). Diversity of vocabulary and the harmonic series law of word-frequency distribution. Psychological Record, 2(16), 379-386. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03393224
Coleman, M., & Liau, T. L. (1975). A computer readability formula designed for machine scoring. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(2), 283-284. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076540
Fang, A. C., & Cao, J. (2009). Adjective Density as a Text Formality Characteristic for Automatic Text Classification: A Study Based on the British National Corpus [Paper presentation]. Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation, Hong Kong, PRC. https://aclanthology.org/Y09-1015.pdf
Flesch, R. (1949). Art of readable writing. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Sheikha, F. A., & Inkpen, D. (2010, August 21-23). Automatic classification of documents by formality [Paper presentation]. International Conference on Natural Language Processing and Knowledge Engineering, Beijing, PRC. http://doi.org/10.1109/NLPKE.2010.5587767
Givón, T. (1985). Function, structure, and language acquisition. In D. I. Slobin (Ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition, Vol. 1. The data; Vol. 2. Theoretical issues, 1005-1027. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Gorfein, D. S. (1989). Resolving Semantic Ambiguity. Springer New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3596-5
Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., Cai, Z., Conley, M. A., Li, H., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2014). Coh-Metrix Measures Text Characteristics at Multiple Levels of Language and Discourse. Elementary School Journal, 115(2), 210-229. https://doi.org/10.1086/678293
Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and Conversation, in Syntax and Semantics, 9. Pragmatics, I.P. Cole & J.L. Morgan (eds.), Academic Press, New York.
Grieve, J, Biber, D, Friginal, E. and Nekrasova, T. (2010). Variation Among Blogs: A Multidimensional Analysis. In Mehler,A., Sharoff,S., and Santini,M. (eds.), Genres on the Web: Computational Models and Empirical Studies, 303-322. Springer: New York.
Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture (1st ed.). New York, NY: Anchor Press Garden City.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1989). Spoken and Written Language. Oxford University Press, USA.
Heylighen, F. (1991). Design of a hypermedia interface translating between associative and formal representations. International Journal of Man-machine Studies, 35(4), 491-515. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0020-7373(05)80089-6
Heylighen, F. (1992). From Complementarity to Bootstrapping of Distinctions: A Reply to Löfgren's Comments on my Proposed 'Structural Language'. International Journal of General Systems, 20(4): 99.
Heylighen, F. (1993). Selection Criteria for the Evolution of Knowledge. Proc. 13th Int. Congress on Cybernetics (Association Internat. de Cybernétique, Namur), 524-528. http://pcp.vub.ac.be/Papers/SelCriteriaKnow.pdf
Heylighen, F., & Dewaele, J. M. (1999). Formality of language: definition, measurement and behavioral determinants. Center “Leo Apostel,” Free University of Brussels. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/Papers/Formality.pdf
Hudson, R. (1994). About 37% of Word-Tokens are Nouns. Language, 70(2), 331-339. https://doi.org/10.2307/415831
Imani, A., & Habil, H. (2017). Lexical Features of Academic Writing. LSP International Journal, 1(1), 41-50. https://doi.org/10.11113/lspi.v1n1.10
Jarvis, S. (2013), Capturing the Diversity in Lexical Diversity. Language Learning, 63, 87-106. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00739.x
Johnson, W. (1944). I. A program of research. The Psychological Monographs, 56(2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0093508
Kajzer-Wietrzny, M., Ferraresi, A., Ilmari, I., & Bernardini, S. (2022). Mediated discourse at the European Parliament: Empirical investigations. In Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research). European Organization for Nuclear Research. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6976930
Knight, D., Adolphs, S., & Carter, R. (2013). Formality in Digital Discourse: A Study of Hedging in CANELC. In Yearbook of corpus linguistics and pragmatics (pp. 131-152). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6250-3_7
Klir, G. J., & Folger, T. A. (1989). Fuzzy sets, uncertainty, and information. European Journal of Operational Research, 42(3), 346. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(89)90454-2
Levelt, W. J. M. (1993). Speaking: From Intention to Articulation. MIT Press. https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/item_67053_16/component/file_2553331/content
Liardét, C. L., Black, S., & Bardetta, V. S. (2019). Defining formality: Adapting to the abstract demands of academic discourse. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 38, 146-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.02.007
Newmark, P. (1983). Approaches to Translation. The Modern Language Journal, 67(2), 210-211. https://doi.org/10.2307/328342
Nord, C. (1988). Textanalyse und Übersetzen: theoretische Grundlagen, Methode und didaktische Anwendung einer übersetzungsrelevanten Textanalyse. Julius Groos Verlag.
Nowson, S., Oberlander, J., & Gill, A. J. (2005). Weblogs, genres and individual differences. In Conference Cognitive Science (Vol. 27, Issue 27). https://escholarship.org/content/qt8bg0t4c6/qt8bg0t4c6.pdf?t=op2m9r
Olohan, M. (2003). How frequent are the contractions? Target-international Journal of Translation Studies, 15(1), 59-89. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.15.1.04olo
Pavlick, E., & Tetreault, J. (2016). An Empirical Analysis of Formality in Online Communication. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 4, 61-74. https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00083
Quadrennial Defense Review. (2022, September). Historical Office, Office of the Secretary of Defense. https://history.defense.gov/Historical-Sources/Quadrennial-Defense-Review/
Quirk, R. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London; New York: Longman.
Readability Formulas. (2012). The Flesch Grade Level Readability Formula. Retrieved March 17, 2023, from http://www.readabilityformulas.com/flesch-grade-level-readability-formula.php
Richards, B. K. (1987). Type/Token Ratios: what do they really tell us? Journal of Child Language, 14(2), 201-209. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305000900012885
Reiss, K. (1989). Text types, translation types and translation assessment. In Chesterman, A. (Ed.), Readings in Translation Theory, 105-115.
U.S. Census Bureau (2022). Educational Attainment of the Population 18 Years and Over, by Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: 2022. United States Census Bureau https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/demo/tables/educational-attainment/2022/cps-detailed-tables/table-1-1.xlsx
Ure, J., & Ellis, J. G. (1977). 7 Register in Descriptive Linguistics and Linguistic Sociology. In De Gruyter eBooks, 197-244. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110806687.197
Yu, G. (2010). Lexical Diversity in Writing and Speaking Task Performances. Applied Linguistics, 31(2), 236-259. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp024
Van Brakel, J. (1992). The complete description of the frame problem. Psycoloquy, 3(3), 11-16. https://lirias.kuleuven.be/bitstream/123456789/513306/1/frame+problem+Psycoloquy.pdf
Vermeer, H. J., & Chesterman, A. (1989). Skopos and commission in translational action. In Routledge eBooks, 219-230. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429280641-26
Wallwork, A. (2016). English for Academic Correspondence. In Springer eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26435-6
Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3), 338-353. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0019-9958(65)90241-x