This article draws on relevance theory (Sperber and Wilson 1986/1995) and its application to translation (Gutt 2000) to investigate processing effort in translation in relation to two different types of encodings, namely conceptual and procedural encodings (Blakemore 2002, Wilson 2011). Building on the experimental paradigm of data triangulation in translation process research (Alves 2003; Jakobsen 2005), it analyses the translation processes of eight professional translators when performing a direct and an inverse translation task. The analysis focuses on the number and types of encodings found in micro/macro translation units (Alves and Vale 2009; 2011). Results suggest that processing effort in translation is greater in instances of procedural than conceptual encodings.
2009 “A New Window on Translators’ Cognitive Activity: Methodological Issues in the Combined Use of Eye Tracking, Key Logging and Retrospective Protocols.” In Methodology, Technology and Innovation in Translation Process Research. A Tribute to Arnt Lykke Jakobsen, ed. by Inger Mees, Fabio Alves, and Susanne Göpferich, 267–291. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.
Alves, Fabio, and Daniel Vale
2009 “Probing the Unit of Translation in Time: Aspects of the Design and Development of a Web Application for Storing, Annotating, and Querying Translation Process Data.” Across Languages and Cultures 10 (2): 251–273.
Alves, Fabio, and Daniel, Vale
2011 “On Drafting and Revision in Translation: A Corpus Linguistics Oriented Analysis of Translation Process Data.” TC3. Translation: Corpora, Computation and Cognition 1 (1): 105–122.
Blakemore, Diane
1987Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.
Blakemore, Diane
2002Relevance and Linguistic Meaning: The Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Elman, Jeffrey L., Elizabeth A. Bates, Mark H. Johnson, Annette Karmiloff-Smith, Domenico Parisi, and Kim Plunkett
1996Rethinking Innateness: A Connectionist Perspective on Development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gutt, Ernst-August
1998 “Relevance and Effort: A Paper for Discussion.” Paper presented at the II Relevance Theory Workshop8–10September 1998, University of Luton.
Gutt, Ernst-August
2000Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context, 2nd ed. Manchester: St Jerome.
Jakobsen, Arnt
2005 “Investigating Expert Translators’ Processing Knowledge.” In Knowledge Systems and Translation, ed. by Helle V. Dam, Jan Engberg, and Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, 173–189. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Jensen, Astrid
2001The Effects of Time on Cognitive Processes and Strategies in Translation. Copenhagen: Working Papers in LSP.
Königs, Frank
1987 “Was beim Übersetzen passiert: theoretische Aspekte, empirische Befunde und praktische Konsequenzen.” Die neueren Sprachen 21: 162–185.
PACTE
2008 “First Results of a Translation Competence Experiment: ‘Knowledge of Translation’ and ‘Efficacy of the Translation Process’.” In Translator and Interpreter Training. Issues, Methods and Debates, ed. by John Kearns, 104–126. London: Continuum.
Scardamalia, Marlene, and Carl Bereiter
1991 “Literate Expertise.” In Toward a General Theory of Expertise, ed. by Karl-Anders Ericsson, and John Smith, 172–194. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shreve, Gregory
2006 “The Deliberate Practice: Translation and Expertise.” Journal of Translation Studies 9 (1): 27–42.
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson
186/1995Relevance: Communication and Cognition, 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.
Taboada, Maite, and William C. Mann
2006 “Rhetorical Structure Theory: Looking Back and Moving Ahead.” Discourse Studies 8 (3): 423–459.
Wilson, Deirdre, and Dan Sperber
1993 “Linguistic Form and Relevance.” Lingua 901: 1–25.
Wilson, Deirdre
2011 “The Conceptual-Procedural Distinction: Past, Present, and Future.” In Procedural Meaning: Problems and Perspectives, ed. by Victoria, Escandell-Vidal, Manuel, Leonetti, and Aoife, Ahern, 3–28. London: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Cited by
Cited by 18 other publications
Abdel Latif, Muhammad M. M.
2018. Towards a typology of pedagogy-oriented translation and interpreting research. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 12:3 ► pp. 322 ff.
Alos, Julieta
2015. Explicating the implicit: an empirical investigation into pragmatic competence in translator training. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 9:3 ► pp. 287 ff.
Alós, Julieta
2016. Discourse relation recognition in translation: a relevance-theory perspective. Perspectives 24:2 ► pp. 201 ff.
2016. The Task of Structuring Information in Translation. In New Directions in Empirical Translation Process Research [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 265 ff.
Carl, Michael
2023. Models of the Translation Process and the Free Energy Principle. Entropy 25:6 ► pp. 928 ff.
Daems, Joke, Sonia Vandepitte, Robert J. Hartsuiker & Lieve Macken
2017. Identifying the Machine Translation Error Types with the Greatest Impact on Post-editing Effort. Frontiers in Psychology 8
Dai, Guangrong
2016. Conclusions and Expectations. In Hybridity in Translated Chinese [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 193 ff.
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen, Michaela Albl-Mikasa, Katrin Andermatt, Andrea Hunziker Heeb & Caroline Lehr
2020. Cognitive load in processing ELF: Translators, interpreters, and other multilinguals. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 9:2 ► pp. 217 ff.
2017. Verbal Reports. In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition, ► pp. 213 ff.
Liu, Kanglong, Muhammad Afzaal & Diego Raphael Amancio
2021. Syntactic complexity in translated and non-translated texts: A corpus-based study of simplification. PLOS ONE 16:6 ► pp. e0253454 ff.
Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M., Bo Wang, Yuanyi Ma & Isaac N. Mwinlaaru
2022. Translation as a Linguistic Process. In Systemic Functional Insights on Language and Linguistics [The M.A.K. Halliday Library Functional Linguistics Series, ], ► pp. 237 ff.
Schaeffer, Moritz, David Huepe, Silvia Hansen-Schirra, Sascha Hofmann, Edinson Muñoz, Boris Kogan, Eduar Herrera, Agustín Ibáñez & Adolfo M. García
2020. The Translation and Interpreting Competence Questionnaire: an online tool for research on translators and interpreters. Perspectives 28:1 ► pp. 90 ff.
Wang, Fuxiang
2022. Impact of translation difficulty and working memory capacity on processing of translation units: evidence from Chinese-to-English translation. Perspectives 30:2 ► pp. 306 ff.
Wang, Yifang
2023. The impact of linguistic metaphor on translation unit in target text processing: An eye tracking and keylogging English-Chinese translation study. Ampersand 11 ► pp. 100129 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.