What does translation memory do to translation? The effect of translation memory output on specific aspects of the translation process

Article Welsh OPEN
Screen, Benjamin

This article reports on a key-logging experiment carried out in order to investigate the effect that Translation Memory matches in the 70%-95% range have on particular aspects of the translation process. Operationalising the translation process as text (re)production following Englund-Dimitrova (2005), Translog-II is used to investigate whether the use of fuzzy matches in this range can reduce cognitive effort based on Working Memory Capacity and recorded pauses, to study the effect that adapting and correcting fuzzy matches in this range has on linear and non-linear writing processes, and to examine variables related to revision, time and productivity. Results show that initial reading time and self-revision is longer in the case of fuzzy match correction compared to manual translation. Data also show however that cognitive load as measured by pauses is reduced and that productivity is also increased. Significant differences are also observed in terms of text production strategies between the translators who edited the fuzzy matches and those who translated without them.
  • References (32)
    32 references, page 1 of 4

    Alves, F., & Vale, D. C. (2011). On drafting and revision in translation: A corpus linguistic oriented analysis of translation process data. Translation: Computation, Corpora, Cognition, 1(1), 105-122.

    Baddeley, A.D. (1999). Essentials of human memory. Hove: Psychology Press.

    Butterworth, B. (1980). Evidence from pauses in speech. In B. Butterworth (Ed.), Language production. Volume 1- Speech and talk (pp. 155-176 ). London: Academic Press.

    Carl, M., Gutermuth, S., & Hansen-Schirra, S. (2015). Post-editing machine translation: Efficiency, strategies and revision processes in professional translation settings. In A. Ferreira & J. W. Schwieter (Eds.), Psycholinguistic and Cognitive Inquiries into Translation and Interpreting (pp. 145-174). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    Christensen, T.P. (2011). Studies on the mental porocesses in translation memoryassisted translation - The state of the art. Trans-Kom, 4(2), 137-160.

    DePalma, D., Stewart, R., & Whittaker, B. (2010). Translation and localization pricing: A comprehensive study of what language services cost. Lowell, Massachusetts: Common Sense Advisory.

    Dragsted, B. (2005). Segmentation in translation: Differences accross levels of experience and difficulty. Target, 17(1), 49-70.

    Dragsted, B. (2010). Co-ordination of reading and writing processes in translation: An eye on unchartered territory. In G. Shreve & E. Angelone (Eds.), Translation and Cognition (pp. 41-63). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    Dragsted, B., & Carl, M. (2013). Towards a classification of translation styles based on eye-tracking and key-logging data. Journal of Writing Research, 5(1), 133- 158.

    Englund-Dimitrova, B. (2005). Expertise and explication in the translation process. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

  • Metrics
    views in OpenAIRE
    views in local repository
    downloads in local repository

    The information is available from the following content providers:

    From Number Of Views Number Of Downloads
    Online Research @ Cardiff - IRUS-UK 0 186
Share - Bookmark