Processes of Translation and Writing: An Analytical Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58213/ell.v2i1.17Keywords:
translation studies, writing competence, text productionAbstract
The study of writing and the study of translation are typically pursued as different pursuits in college. Many similarities have been found between the two groups, as evidenced by studies undertaken on both groups that usually employ the same study approach. A focus on writing and translation as methods of text production is encouraged in this introduction. Examples of study subjects at the interface of writing and translation are sketched out. Following this introduction, we'll take a closer look at competency and profiles, two of these aspects.
References
• Alexander, C. (1964). Notes on the synthesis of form. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Archer, L.B. (1969). The structure of the design process. In G. Broadbent & A. Ward (Eds.), Design methods of architecture. New York: Wittenborn.
• Bayerman, C. (Ed.) (2007). Handbook of research on writing. History, society, school, individual, text. New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
• Becker-Mrotzek, M. (1997). Schreibentwicklung und Textproduktion [Writing development and text production]. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
• Bereiter, C. (1980). Development in Writing. In L.W. Gregg & E.R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive Processes in Writing (pp. 73-93). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
• Boehm, D.C. (1993). Mozartians, Beethovians, and the teaching of writing. The Quarterly, 15(2), 15-18.
• Christensen, T.P., &Schjoldager, A. (2010). Translation-Memory (TM) Research: What Do We Know and How Do We Know It? Hermes, 44, 89-101. Retrieved from on 09.04.2012.
• Christensen, T.P., &Schjoldager A. (2011). The Impact of Translation Memory (TM) Technology on Cognitive Processes: Student-Translators’ Retrospective Comments in an Online Questionnaire. In B. Sharp, M. Zock, M. Carl & A.L. Jakobsen (Eds.), Human-machine Interaction in Translation (Copenhagen Studies in Language 41, pp. 119-130). Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.
• Dam-Jensen, H. (2012). Decision-making in Translation -- A Pilot Study of Students' Translation Processes. Fachsprache, XXXIV(3-4), 146-164.
• Dam-Jensen, H. & Heine, C. (2009). Process Research Methods and Their Application in the Didactics of Text Production and Translation. Shedding Light on the Use of Research Methods in the University Classroom. Trans-komZeitschriftfür Translation swissenschaft und Fachkommunikation, 2(1), 1-25.
• Dam-Jensen, H., Heine, C., & Schrijver, I. (in prep.). An interdisciplinary approach to text production: Talking about terms of the trade(s) first.
• Dragsted, B. (2004). Segmentation in Translation and Translation Memory Systems -- An Empirical Investigation of Cognitive Segmentation and Effects of Integrating a TM System into the Translation Process. PhD dissertation. (Copenhagen Working Papers in LSP). Copenhagen: Sam funds litteratur.
• Dragsted, B. (2006). Computer-aided Translation as a Distributed Cognitive Task. Pragmatics & Cognition, 14(2), 443-464. doi: 10.1075/pc.14.2.17dra
• Englund Dimitrova, B. (2005). Expertise and Explicitation in the Translation Process. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/btl.64
• Flower, L. & Hayes, J.R. (1980). Identifying the Organization of Writing Processes. In L.W. Gregg & E.R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive Processes in Writing (pp. 3-30). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
• Gambier, Y. (2010). Translation strategies and tactics. In Y. Gambier, & L. van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of Translation Studies (vol. 1). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 412-418. doi: 10.1075/hts.1.tra7
• Gile, D. (2004). Integrated Problem and Decision Reporting as a Translator Training Tool. The Journal of Specialised Translation 2, 2-20. Retrieved from http://www.jostrans.org on 23-02- 2009.
• Goel, V., &Pirolli, P. (1992). The Structure of Design Problem Spaces. Cognitive Science, 16, 395- 429. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog1603_3
• Göpferich, S. (2002). TextproduktionimZeitalter der Globalisierung. EntwicklungeinerDidaktik des Wissenstransfers [Textproduction in the age of globalization. Development of a didactic of knowledge transfer]. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.
• Göpferich, S. (2008). Translationsprozessforschung [Translation process research]. Tübingen: NarrFranckeAttempo.
• Göpferich, S., &Jääskeläinen, R. (2009). Process research into the development of translation competence: Where are we, and where do we need to go? Across Languages and Cultures, 10(2), 169-191. doi: 10.1556/Acr.10.2009.2.1
• Guilford, J.P. (1971). The Nature of Human Intelligence. London: McGraw-Hill.
• Hayes, J.R. (2012). Modeling and Remodeling Writing. Written communication 29(3), 369-388. doi: 10.1177/0741088312451260
• Heine, C. (2012). Prozessansatzimtraditionellproduktorientierten "Academic Writing" Textproduktionsunterricht [Process approach in the traditionally product-oriented academic writing training]. In D. Knorr & A. Verhein-Jarren (Eds.), Schreibenunter den Bedingungen von Mehrsprachigkeit [Writing in a mulitlingual context] (pp. 99-116). Frankfurt a.M. u. a.: Lang, 99-116.
• Heine, C., & Koch, W. (2009). Prozess- und Produktoptimierungbei der Textproduktion. Translogalsdidaktisches Instrument? PilotstudiemitStudierenden der Wirtschaftsuniversität Aarhus, Dänemark. [Process and product optimization in text production. Translog as a didactic tool? Pilot study with students of the Aarhus School of Business, Denmark]. In F. Lenz (Ed.), SchlüsselqualifikationSprache: Anforderungen - Standards -- Vermittlung [Key qualification language. Requirements - Standards - Didactics]. (Forum AngewandteLinguistik 50, pp. 176- 204). Frankfurt am Main u. a.: Lang.
• Heine, C. & Schubert, K. (forthcoming). Modellierung in der Fachkommunikation. Fachsprache, Vol. XXXIVI [Modelling in specialized discourse communication. Fachsprache]. (n.p.n.).
• Holz-Mänttäri, J. (1986). TranslatorischesHandeln -- theoretischfundierteBerufsprofile [Translational action - theoretically based professional job profiles]. In M. Snell-Hornby (Ed.), Übersetzungswissenschaft -- Eine Neurorientierung. ZurIntegrierung von Theorie und Praxis [Translation studies - New perspectives. Integrating theory and praxis]. (UTB 1415, pp. 348- 374). Tübingen/Basel: Francke.
• Immonen, S. &Mäkisalo, J. (2010). Pauses reflecting the processing of syntactic units in monolingual text production and translation. Hermes -- Journal of Language and Communication Studies, 44, 45-61.
• Jääiskeläinen, R. (2009). Looking for a working definition of ‘translation strategies’. In I.M. Mees, F. Alves & S. Göpferich (Eds.), Methodology, Technology and Innovation in Translation Process Research: A Tribute to ArntLykke Jakobsen (pp. 375-387). Copenhagen: Copenhagen Studies in Language.
• Jakobsen, A.L. (1999). Translog Documentation. In G. Hansen (Ed.), Probing the process in translation: methods and results (Copenhagen Studies in Language 24, pp. 149-184). Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.
• Jakobsen, A.L. (2003). Effects of Think Aloud on Translation Speed, Revision and Segmentation. In F. Alves (Ed.), Triangulating Translation (pp. 69-95). Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/btl.45.08jak
• Jakobsen, A.L. (2005). Investigating expert translators -- processing knowledge. In H.V. Dam, J. Engberg & H. Gerzymisch-Arbogast (Eds.), Knowledge Systems and Translation (Text, Translation, Computational Processing, pp. 173-189). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
• Jakobsen, A.L. (2006). Research Methods in Translation -- Translog. In E. Lindgren & K. Sullivan (Eds.), Computer Key Stroke Logging and Writing. Methods and Applications (Studies in Writing, pp. 95-105). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
• Kiraly, D. (2000). A Social Constructivist Approach to Translator Education. Empowerment from Theory to Practice. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
• Kellogg, R.T. (2008). Training writing skills: A cognitive developmental perspective. Journal of Writing Research, 1(1), 1-26.
• Kelly, D. (2005). A Handbook for Translator Trainers. A Guide to Reflective Practice. Manchester, UK & Northampton MA: St. Jerome Publishing.
• Massey, G., &Ehrensberger-Dow, M. (2011). Commenting on translation: Implications for translator training. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 16, 26-41.
• Nord, C. (1997). Translating as a Purposeful Activity (Translation Theories Explained). Manchester: St Jerome.
• O’Brien, S. (2010). Eye tracking in translation process research: methodological challenges and solutions. In I. Mees, F. Alves, & S. Göpferich (eds.), Methodology, Technology and Innovation in Translation (Copenhagen Studies In Language 38, pp. 251-266). Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.
• Opdenacker, L., Stassen, I., Vaes, S., Van Waes, L., & Jacobs, L. (2009). Quadem: Manual for the Quality Assessment of Digital Educational Material. Antwerp: University of Antwerp. Retrieved 09-04-2013 from http://www.scribani.org/quadem/material_Q/handbook/Handbook.pdf.
• PACTE (2000). Acquiring translation competence: Hypotheses and methodological problems in a research project. In A. Beeby, D. Ensinger& M. Presas. Investigating Translation. Papers from the 4th International Congress on Translation, Barcelona, 1998, pp. 99-106. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
• PACTE (2005). Investigating translation competence: Conceptual and methodological issues. Meta, Translators’ Journal, 50(2), 609-619.
• PACTE (2009). Results of the validation of the PACTE translation competence model: acceptability and decision making. Across Languages and Cultures, 10(2), 207-230. doi: 10.1556/Acr.10.2009.2.3
• Pommer, S.E. (2008). No creativity in legal translation? Babel, 54(4), 355-368. doi: 10.1075/babel.54.4.04pom
• Pospiech, U. (2005). Schreibendschreibenlernen. Über die Schreibhandlungzum Text alsSprachwerk [Learning writing while writing. Reaching a crafted language text product via writing action] (Theorie und Vermittlung der Sprache 39) Frankfurt am Main u.a.: Lang.
• Reiss, K. & Vermeer, H.J. (1984). GrundlegungeinerallgemeinenTranslationstheorie [Setting the grounds for a general translation theory]. Tübingen: Niemeyer. doi: 10.1515/9783111351919
• Risku, H. (1998). TranslatorischeKompetenz: KognitiveGrundlagen des ÜbersetzensalsExpertentätigkeit [Translation competence: cognitive grounds of translation as an expert activity]. Tübingen: Narr.
• Risku, H. (2010). A cognitive scientific view on technical communication and translation: Do embodiment and situatedness really make a difference? Target, 22(1), 94-111. doi: 10.1075/target.22.1.06ris
• Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of Categorization. In E. Rosch, & B.B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and Categorization. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Scheuermann U. (2012). Schreibdenken. SchreibenalsDenk- und Lernwerkezugnutzen und vermitteln [Think-writing. Using and teaching writing as a thinking and learning tool]. Opladen: Verlag Barbara Budrich.
• Schjoldager, A. (2010). Understanding Translation. Aarhus: Academica.
• Schubert, K. (2007). Wissen, Sprache, Medium, Arbeit. Ein integratives Modell der ein- und mehrsprachigenFachkommunikation [Knowledge, Language, Medium, Production. An integrative model of monolingual and multilingual specialized discourse communication] (Forum fürFachsprachenforschung 76). Tübingen: Narr.
• Steiner, E. (1988). Describing language as an activity: an application to child language. In P. Fawcett, & D. Young (Eds.), New developments in systemic linguistics. Vol. 2: Theory and application (pp. 144-173). London and New York: Pinter Publishers.
• Van Vaerenbergh, L. (2012): FunktionalistischeTranslationstheorie und technischeKommunikation. trans-kom, 5(2), 274-292.
• Van Waes, L. &Leijten, M. (2006). Logging Writing Processes with Inputlog. In L. Van Waes, M. Leijten& C.M. Neuwirth (Eds), Writing and Digital Media. (Studies in Writing 17, pp. 158- 165). Oxford: Elsevier.
• Van Waes, L., Leijten, M. & Quinlan, T. (2009). Reading during sentence composing and error correction: a multilevel analysis of the influence of task complexity. Reading and Writing. An Interdisciplinary Journal, 23(7), 803-834.
• Van Waes, L., Leijten, M., Wengelin, Å., & Lindgren, E. (2012). Logging tools to study digital writing processes. In V. W. Berninger (Ed.), Past, present, and future contributions of cognitive writing research to cognitive psychology (pp. 507-533). New York/Sussex: Taylor & Francis. doi: 10.1007/s11145-009-9190-x
• Vinay, J.-P., &Darbelnet, J. (1958). Stylistiquecomparée du français et de l’anglais [Comparative stylistics, from French to English]. Paris: Didier.
• Wittgenstein, L. (1953/1958). Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Zethsen, K.K. (2006). The translator as cultural mediator. In I. Askehave, & B. Norlyk (Eds.), Meanings and Messages. Intercultural business communication (pp. 97-114). Aarhus: Academica.
• Zethsen, K.K. (2009). Intralingual Translation: An Attempt at Description. Meta, Translators’ Journal, 54(4), 795-812.
