ALPAC, Automatic Language Processing Advisory Committee
1966Language and Machines: Computers in translation and linguistics. Publication 1416. Washington, DC: National Research Council.Google Scholar
Banerjee, Satanjeev, and Alon Lavie
2005 “METEOR: An automatic metric for MT evaluation with improved correlation with human judgments.” In Proceedings of the ACL workshop on intrinsic and extrinsic evaluation measures for machine translation and/or summarization, 65–72.Google Scholar
Carl, Michael, and Barbara Dragsted
2012 “Inside the monitor model: Processes of default and challenged translation production”. Translation: Corpora, Computation, Cognition 2 (1): 127–145.Google Scholar
De Groot, Annette M. B.
1997 “The cognitive study of translation and interpretation: Three approaches.” In Cognitive processes in translation and interpreting, ed. by Joseph Danks, Gregory Shreve, Stephen Fountain, and Michael McBeath, 25–56. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta
2005Expertise and Explicitation in the Translation Process. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halverson, Sandra
Hutto, Daniel D., and Erik Myin
2017Evolving enactivism: Basic minds meet content. Cambridge, MA: MIT press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ilg, Gérard, and Sylvie Lambert
1996 “Teaching consecutive interpreting.” Interpreting 1(1): 69–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kiraly, Don
2013 “Towards a view of translator competence as an emergent phenomenon: Thinking outside the box (es) in translator education.” New prospects and perspectives for educating language mediators, ed. by Donald Kiraly, Silvia Hansen-Schirra, and Karin Maksymski, 197–224. Tūbingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Krings, Hans P.
2001Repairing texts: Empirical investigations of machine translation post-editing processes. Vol. 5. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.Google Scholar
Lacruz, Isabel
2017 “Cognitive effort in translation, editing and post-editing.” In Handbook of Translation and Cognition, ed. by John W. Schwieter, and Aline Ferreira, 386–401. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lacruz, Isabel, and Riitta Jääskeläinen
(eds.) 2018Innovation and expansion in translation process research. Volume XVIII of the American Translators Association Scholarly Monograph series. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lacruz, Isabel, Michael Denkowski, and Alon Lavie
2014 “Cognitive demand and cognitive effort in post-editing.” In Proceedings of the 11th Conference of the Association for Machine Translation in the Americas, 73–84.Google Scholar
Macizo, Pedro, and M. Teresa Bajo
2006 “Reading for repetition and reading for translation: Do they involve the same processes?.” Cognition 99(1): 1–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muñoz, Ricardo
2016 “Of minds and men – computers and translators.” Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 52 (2), 351–381.Google Scholar
Omar, Abdulfattah, and Yasser Gomaa
2020 “The machine translation of literature: Implications for translation pedagogy.” International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET) 15(11): 228–235. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Papineni, Kishore, Salim Roukos, Todd Ward, and Wei-Jing Zhu
2002 “Bleu: a method for automatic evaluation of machine translation.” In Proceedings of the 40th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 311–318.Google Scholar
Schaeffer, Moritz, Barbara Dragsted, Kristian Tangsgaard Hvelplund, Laura Winther Balling, and Michael Carl
2016 “Word translation entropy: Evidence of early target language activation during reading for translation.” In New directions in empirical translation process research, 183–210. Berlin: Springer, Cham. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schaeffer, Moritz, and Carl, Michael
2013, 2015 “Shared Representations and the Translation Process: A Recursive Model.” In Translation and Interpreting Studies, 8 ( 2 ),169–190. Reprint in Describing Cognitive Processes in Translation: Acts and Events, ed. by Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow, Birgitta Englund Dimitrova, Séverine Hubscher-Davidson, and Ulf Norberg. Benjamins Current Topics, 77. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, Lane
2018 “The history and promise of machine translation.” In Innovation and expansion in translation process research, ed. by Isabel Lacruz, and Riitta Jāāskelāinen, 161–190. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seleskovitch, Danica
1976 “Interpretation, a psychological approach to translating.” In Translation: Applications and Research, ed. by R. Bruce, W. Anderson, and Richard W. Brislin, 92–116. New York, NY: Gardner Press.Google Scholar
Snover, Matthew, Bonnie Dorr, Richard Schwartz, Linnea Micciulla, and John Makhoul
2006 “A study of translation edit rate with targeted human annotation.” In Proceedings of the 7th Conference of the Association for Machine Translation in the Americas: Technical Papers, 223–231.Google Scholar
Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja
2005 “The monitor model revisited: Evidence from process research.” Meta 50(2): 405–414. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Toral, Antonio, and Andy Way
2018 “What level of quality can neural machine translation attain on literary text?” In Translation Quality Assessment, 263–287. Berlin: Springer, Cham. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yamada, Masaru