This dissertation deals with the different explanations for increased explicitness in translated Dutch (compared to original Dutch) that have been proposed over the years and presents the results of a multifactorial corpus study of two different alternations: the om-alternation (1) and the dative alternation (2) which both have an explicit and implicit variant. (1) a. Hij belooft om op tijd te komen. (He promises to be on time) b. Hij belooft op tijd te komen. (2) a. Jasper geeft een boek aan Emma. (Jasper gives a book to Emma) b. Jasper geeft Emma een boek. (Jasper gives Emma a book) Although most researchers agree that translations are characterized by an increase in explicitness, there is disagreement about the various explanations for this. Kruger (2019) distinguishes three different types of explanations: (i) translators tend to opt more often for the explicit variant because they experience higher cognitive pressure as a result of constantly switching between two languages (processing-strain), (ii) translators more often choose for the explicit variant to reduce or even avoid the risk of miscommunication (risk-aversion), and (iii) translators opt for the explicit construction under the influence of the source language structure (source-language transfer). Based on various mixed-effects logistic regression analyses with data culled from the Dutch Parallel Corpus, we investigated how the influence of language internal and external factors on the choice for the explicit or implicit option varies depending on the translation status of the text and how the different hypotheses are compatible with our research results. Three main conclusions can be drawn. Firstly, it appears that there is no 'universal' explanation for increased explicitness in translations that applies to every alternation. The translator’s choice of a particular construction depends on the features of the investigated alternation in the source and target language. Secondly, our research shows that different preferences depending on the ...