1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Cognitive Linguistic Studies
  4. Volume 8, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 8, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2213-8722
  • E-ISSN: 2213-8730
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Since its inception, Translation Studies has hinged on theoretical concepts of effects and reception, with various reader-oriented notions such as equivalent effect, , acceptability and adequacy, and user-centredness, to name but a few, having pervaded the discipline for decades. Despite this preoccupation with the phenomenology of translations, we still know very little about how translations are actually experienced – translations especially. This article calls for an expansion of research into the reception and experience of source texts and their translations, reviewing the opportunities afforded by recent technological developments in eye-tracking, galvanic skin response sensors, echocardiogram monitors, and other multi-sensory devices. Using a short case study, a number of research questions and an outline of an experimental method are proposed to contrast the reading experience of two translations of the same source text, serving as a prompt for future research of this kind. By drawing inspiration from the few existing examples of research in this incipient paradigm and the considerations offered in the example, this article aims to stimulate future research to explore the vast untapped potential in this area and to arrive at a better understanding of the effects that different translation approaches yield and the potential variation in effects between source and target text.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/cogls.00087.wal
2021-11-22
2023-09-30

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/cogls.00087.wal
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alves, F., & Hurtado Albir, A.
    (2017) Evolution, challenges, and perspectives for research on cognitive aspects of translation. InJ. W. Schwieter & A. Ferreira (Eds.), The handbook of translation and cognition (pp.537–554). Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 10.1002/9781119241485.ch29
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119241485.ch29 [Google Scholar]
  2. Alves, F., & Jakobsen, A. L.
    (Eds.) (2021) The Routledge handbook of translation and cognition. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Alves, F., Pagano, A., & da Silva, I.
    (2011) Towards an investigation of reading modalities in/for translation: An exploratory study using eye-tracking data. InS. O’Brien (Ed.), Cognitive explorations of translation (pp.175–196). London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Baceviciute, S., Mottelson, A., Terkildsen, T., & Makransky, G.
    (2020) Investigating representation of text and audio in educational VR using learning outcomes and EEG. Paper presented at the2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Honolulu. 25–30 April 2020. aske.mottelson.dk/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Paper743.pdf. 10.1145/3313831.3376872
     https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376872 [Google Scholar]
  5. Balling, L. W., & Hvelplund, K. T.
    (2015) Design and statistics in quantitative translation (process) research. Translation Spaces, 4(1), 169–186. 10.1075/ts.4.1.08bal
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.4.1.08bal [Google Scholar]
  6. Bayer, M., Sommer, W., & Schacht, A.
    (2010) Reading emotional words within sentences: The impact of arousal and valence on event-related potentials. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 78, 299–307. 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2010.09.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2010.09.004 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bortolussi, M., & Dixon, P.
    (2003) Psychonarratology: Foundations for the empirical study of literary response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Brems, E., & Ramos Pinto, S.
    (2013) Reception and translation. InY. Gambier & L. V. Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of Translation Studies (Vol.4, pp.142–147). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. 10.1075/hts.4.rec1
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hts.4.rec1 [Google Scholar]
  9. Brishtel, I., Khan, A. A., Schmidt, T., Dingler, T., Ishimaru, S., & Dengel, A.
    (2020) Mind wandering in a multimodal reading setting: Behavior analysis and automatic detection using eye-tracking and an EDA sensor. Sensors, 20(9), 2546. 10.3390/s20092546
     https://doi.org/10.3390/s20092546 [Google Scholar]
  10. Castiglione, D.
    (2017) Difficult poetry processing: Reading times and the narrativity hypothesis. Language and Literature, 26(2), 99–121. 10.1177/0963947017704726
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947017704726 [Google Scholar]
  11. Chesterman, A.
    (1998) Causes, translations, effects. Target, 10(2), 201–230. 10.1075/target.10.2.02che
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.10.2.02che [Google Scholar]
  12. Colman, A. M.
    (2008) Dictionary of psychology (3rd Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Cop, U., Keuleers, E., Drieghe, D., & Duyck, W.
    (2015) Frequency effects in monolingual and bilingual natural reading. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 22(5), 1216–1234. 10.3758/s13423‑015‑0819‑2
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0819-2 [Google Scholar]
  14. Crisis Translation
    Crisis Translation. (n.d.). INTERACT International network on crisis translation. Retrieved fromhttps://sites.google.com/view/crisistranslation/consortium (Accessed on10 July 2020).
  15. d’Ydewalle, G., Van Rensbergen, J., & Pollet, J.
    (1987) Reading a message when the same message is available auditorily in another language: The case of subtitling. InJ. K. O’Reagan & A. Lévy Schoen (Eds.), Eye movements: From physiology to cognition (pp.313–321). Amsterdam: Elsevier. 10.1016/B978‑0‑444‑70113‑8.50047‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-70113-8.50047-3 [Google Scholar]
  16. Doherty, S., & O’Brien, S.
    (2014) Assessing the usability of raw machine translated output: A user-centered study using eye tracking. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 30(1), 40–51. 10.1080/10447318.2013.802199
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2013.802199 [Google Scholar]
  17. Doherty, S., O’Brien, S., & Carl, M.
    (2010) Eye Tracking as an MT evaluation technique. Machine Translation, 24, 1–13. 10.1007/s10590‑010‑9070‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10590-010-9070-9 [Google Scholar]
  18. Dragsted, B., & Hansen, I. G.
    (2008) Comprehension and production in translation: A Pilot study on segmentation and the coordination of reading and writing processes. InI. M. Mees, F. Alves, & S. Göpferich (Eds.), Methodology, technology and innovation in translation process research (pp.9–29). Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Dupré, D., Krumhuber, E. G., Küster, D., & McKeown, G. J.
    (2020) A Performance comparison of eight commercially available automatic classifiers for facial affect recognition. PloS one, 15(4), e0231968. doi:  10.1371/journal.pone.0231968
     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231968 [Google Scholar]
  20. Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V.
    (1978) Facial action coding system: A technique for the measurement of facial movement. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Ekman, P., Friesen, W. V., & Hager, J. C.
    (2002) Facial action coding system: The manual on CD-ROM. Salt Lake City: A Human Face.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Federici, F. M.
    (2018a) A mapping exercise: Eye tracking, translation, and multi-sensorial data. Instituto de Engenharia de Sistemas e Computadores, Investigação e Desenvolvimento em Lisboa (INESC-ID), Lisbon, Portugal. 6April 2018.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. (2018b) Tracking eyes and chasing comprehension: From english as lingua franca to english as pivot language to access crucial information. Paper presented at theBiennial Conference of the Associazione Italiana di Anglistica [Italian Association of English Studies], University of Macerata, Italy. 18–19 May 2018.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Federici, F. M., & Walker, C.
    (2018) A mapping exercise: Eye tracking and translation. InC. Walker & F. M. Federici (Eds.), Eye-tracking and multidisciplinary studies on translation (pp.11–29). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.143.02fed
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.143.02fed [Google Scholar]
  25. Fish, S.
    (1976) Interpreting the “Variorum”. Critical Inquiry, 2(3), 465–485. 10.1086/447852
     https://doi.org/10.1086/447852 [Google Scholar]
  26. (1980) Is there a text in this class? The authority of interpretive communities. Cambridge: MA: Harvard University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Gambier, Y.
    (2018) Translation Studies, audiovisual translation and reception. InE. Di Giovanni & Y. Gambier (Eds.), Reception studies and audiovisual translation (pp.43–67). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.141.04gam
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.141.04gam [Google Scholar]
  28. García, A. M., Mikulan, E., & Ibáñez, A.
    (2016) A neuroscientific toolkit for Translation Studies. InR. Muñoz Martín (Ed.), Reembedding translation process research (pp.21–46). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.128.02gar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.128.02gar [Google Scholar]
  29. Gentikow, B.
    (2005) Exploring media experiences: A new approach to reception theory and empirical studies. Paper presented at theFirst European Communication Conference, Amsterdam. November 2005.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Hansen-Schirra, S., & Gutermuth, S.
    (2015) Approaching comprehensibility in translation studies. InK. Maksymski, S. Gutermuth, & S. Hansen-Schirra (Eds.), Translation and comprehensibility (pp.53–77). Berlin: Frank & Timme.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Hartung, F., Burke, M., Hagoort, P., & Willems, R. M.
    (2016) Taking perspective: Personal pronouns affect experiential aspects of literary reading. PloS one, 11(5), e0154732. doi:  10.1371/journal.pone.0154732
     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154732 [Google Scholar]
  32. Holmqvist, K., Nyström, M., Andersson, R., Dewhurst, R., Jarodzka, H., & Van De Weijer, J.
    (2015) Eye tracking: A comprehensive guide to methods and measures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Holz-Mänttäri, J.
    (1984) Translatorisches handeln: Theorie und methode. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakademia.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Huang, J.
    (2018) Working Styles of Student Translators in Self-Revision, Other-Revision and Post-Editing. InC. Walker & F. M. Federici (Eds.), Eye tracking and multidisciplinary studies on translation (pp.145–184). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.143.08hua
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.143.08hua [Google Scholar]
  35. Hvelplund, K. T.
    (2017) Eye tracking in translation process research. InJ. W. Schwieter & A. Ferreira (Eds.), The handbook of translation and cognition (pp.248–264). Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 10.1002/9781119241485.ch14
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119241485.ch14 [Google Scholar]
  36. iMotions
    iMotions. (n.d.). Affectiva iMotions Biometric Research Platform. Retrieved fromhttps://imotions.com/affectiva/ (Accessed on9 July 2020).
  37. Iser, W.
    (1974) The implied reader: Patterns of communication in prose, fiction from Bunyan to Beckett. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Jakobsen, A. L.
    (2017) Translation process research. InJ. W. Schwieter & A. Ferreira (Eds.), The handbook of translation and cognition (pp.21–49). Maiden, MA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 10.1002/9781119241485.ch2
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119241485.ch2 [Google Scholar]
  39. Jakobsen, A. L., & Alves, F.
    (2021) Introduction. InF. Alves & A. L. Jakobsen (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of translation and cognition (pp.1–22). Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Jakobsen, A. L., & Jensen, K. T. H.
    (2008) Eye movement behaviour across four different types of reading task. InS. Göpferich, A. L. Jakobsen, & I. M. Mees (Eds.), Looking at eyes: Eye-tracking studies of reading and translation processing. (pp.103–124). Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Jensen, K. T. H.
    (2011) Distribution of attention between source text and target text during translation. InS. O’Brien (Ed.), Cognitive explorations of translation (pp.215–237). London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A.
    (1980) A Theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87(4), 329–354. 10.1037/0033‑295X.87.4.329
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.87.4.329 [Google Scholar]
  43. Korpal, P., & Jasielska, A.
    (2019) Investigating interpreters’ empathy: Are emotions in simultaneous interpreting contagious?Target, 31(1), 2–24. 10.1075/target.17123.kor
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.17123.kor [Google Scholar]
  44. Kotze, H.
    (2020) Converging what and how to find out why: An outlook on empirical translation studies. InL. Vandevoorde, J. Daems, & B. Defrancq (Eds.), New empirical perspectives on translation and interpreting (pp.333–371). London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Krings, H. P.
    (2005) Wege ins labyrinth – Fragestellungen und methoden der übersetzungsprozessforschung im überblick. Meta, 50(2), 345–358. 10.7202/010941ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/010941ar [Google Scholar]
  46. Kruger, H.
    (2012) Postcolonial polysystems: the production and reception of translated children’s literature in South Africa. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.105
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.105 [Google Scholar]
  47. (2013) Child and adult readers’ processing of foreignised elements in translated South African picturebooks: an eye-tracking study. Target, 25(2), 180–227. 10.1075/target.25.2.03kru
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.25.2.03kru [Google Scholar]
  48. (2016) Fluency/resistancy and domestication/foreignisation. Target, 28(1), 4–41. 10.1075/target.28.1.01kru
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.28.1.01kru [Google Scholar]
  49. Kruger, H., & Kruger, J.-L.
    (2017) Cognition and reception. InJ. W. Schwieter & A. Ferreira (Eds.), The handbook of translation and cognition (pp.71–89). Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781119241485.ch4
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119241485.ch4 [Google Scholar]
  50. Kruger, J.-L.
    (2018) Eye tracking in audiovisual translation research. InL. Pérez-González (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of audiovisual translation (pp.350–366). London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315717166‑22
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315717166-22 [Google Scholar]
  51. Kruger, J.-L., Hefer, E., & Matthew, G.
    (2013) Measuring the impact of subtitles on cognitive load: Eye tracking and dynamic audiovisual texts. Paper presented at theProceedings of the 2013 Conference on Eye Tracking South Africa. 10.1145/2509315.2509331
     https://doi.org/10.1145/2509315.2509331 [Google Scholar]
  52. Kulke, L., Feyerabend, D., & Schacht, A.
    (2020) A comparison of the affectiva imotions facial expression analysis software with EMG for identifying facial expression of emotion. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(329). doi:  10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00329
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00329 [Google Scholar]
  53. Laeng, B., Sirois, S., & Gredebäck, G.
    (2012) Pupillometry: A window to the preconscious?Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(1), 18–27. 10.1177/1745691611427305
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691611427305 [Google Scholar]
  54. Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N.
    (1998) Emotion, motivation, and anxiety: Brain mechanisms and psychophysiology. Biological Psychiatry, 44, 1248–1263. 10.1016/S0006‑3223(98)00275‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3223(98)00275-3 [Google Scholar]
  55. Leppihalme, R.
    (1997) Culture bumps: An empirical approach to the translation of allusions. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Malcolm, J.
    (2016) Socks. The New York Review of Books. Retrieved fromhttps://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/06/23/socks-translating-anna-karenina/ (Accessed on10 July 2020).
     [Google Scholar]
  57. McKim, C. A.
    (2017) The value of mixed methods research: A mixed methods study. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 11(2), 202–222. 10.1177/1558689815607096
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815607096 [Google Scholar]
  58. Morson, G. S.
    (2010) The pevearsion of Russian literature. Commentary, 130(1), 92–92.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Muñoz Martín, R.
    (2017) Looking toward the future of cognitive translation studies. InJ. W. Schwieter & A. Ferreira (Eds.), The handbook of translation and cognition (pp.555–572). Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 10.1002/9781119241485.ch30
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119241485.ch30 [Google Scholar]
  60. Nida, E.
    (1964) Toward a science of translating with special reference to principles and procedures involved in Bible translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Niedermeyer, E., & Lopes da Silva, F. H.
    (2012) Electroencephalography: Basic principles, clinical applications, and related fields (6th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Noldus
    Noldus. (n.d.). FaceReader. Retrieved fromhttps://www.noldus.com/facereader (Accessed on9 July 2020).
  63. Nord, C.
    (2005) Text analysis in translation (C. Nord & P. Sparrow, Trans.). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. O’Brien, S.
    (2006) Eye-tracking and translation memory matches. Perspectives, 14(3), 185–205.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. (2009) Eye tracking in translation process research: Methodological challenges and solutions. InI. M. Mees, F. Alves, & S. Göpferich (Eds.), Methodology, technology and innovation in translation process research. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. (2013) The borrowers: Researching the cognitive aspects of translation. Target, 25(1), 5–17. 10.1075/target.25.1.02obr
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.25.1.02obr [Google Scholar]
  67. (Ed.) (2011) Cognitive explorations of translation. London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Olalla-Soler, C., Franco Aixelá, J., & Rovira-Esteva, S.
    (2020) Mapping cognitive translation and interpreting studies: A bibliometric approach. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies, 19, 25–52.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Orero, P., Doherty, S., Kruger, J.-L., Matamala, A., Pedersen, J., Perego, E., … Szarkowska, A.
    (2018) Conducting experimental research in audiovisual translation (AVT): A position paper. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 30, 105–126.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Orrego-Carmona, D.
    (2018) Audiovisual translation and audience reception. InL. Pérez-González (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of audiovisual translation (pp.367–382). London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315717166‑23
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315717166-23 [Google Scholar]
  71. Puurtinen, T.
    (1995) Linguistic acceptability in translated children’s literature. (PhD Thesis), University of Joensuu, Joensuun Yliopiston Humanistisia Julkaisuja, 15.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Pym, A.
    (2020) How are translations really received?Paper presented at theCardiff University School of Modern Languages Research Seminars, Cardiff University. 19 November 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjKbGEWQECc
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Rayner, K., & Liversedge, S. P.
    (2011) Linguistic and cognitive influences on eye movements during reading. InS. P. Liversedge, I. Gilchrist, & S. Everling (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of eye movements (pp.751–764). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Reiss, K., & Vermeer, H. J.
    (1984) Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie [Groundwork for a General Theory of Translation]. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 10.1515/9783111351919
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111351919 [Google Scholar]
  75. Remnick, D.
    (2005) The Translation Wars. The New Yorker. Retrieved fromhttps://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/11/07/the-translation-wars (Accessed on10 July 2020).
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Rojo, A., Ramos, M., & Valenzuela, J.
    (2014) the emotional impact of translation: A heart rate study. Journal of Pragmatics, 71, 31–34. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.07.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.07.006 [Google Scholar]
  77. Rojo López, A. M., & Korpal, P.
    (2020) Through your skin to your heart and brain: A critical evaluation of physiological methods in cognitive translation and interpreting studies. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies, 19, 191–217.
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Saldanha, G., & O’Brien, S.
    (2014) Research methodologies in translation studies. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315760100
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315760100 [Google Scholar]
  79. Sanford, A. J., & Emmott, C.
    (2012) Mind, brain and narrative: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139084321
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139084321 [Google Scholar]
  80. Schacht, A., Dimigen, O., & Sommer, W.
    (2010) Emotions in cognitive conflicts are not aversive but are task specific. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 10(3), 349–356. 10.3758/CABN.10.3.349
     https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.10.3.349 [Google Scholar]
  81. Schaeffer, M., Nitzke, J., & Hansen-Schirra, S.
    (2019) Predictive turn in translation studies: Review and prospects. InS. Brunn & R. Kehrein (Eds.), Handbook of the changing world language map (pp.3939–3961). Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑73400‑2_217‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73400-2_217-1 [Google Scholar]
  82. Selvaraj, J., Murugappan, M., Wan, K., & Yaacob, S.
    (2013) Classification of emotional states from electrocardiogram signals: A non-linear approach based on hurst. BioMedical Engineering OnLine, 12(44). 10.1186/1475‑925X‑12‑44
     https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-925X-12-44 [Google Scholar]
  83. Sjørup, A. C.
    (2008) Metaphor comprehension in translation: Methodological issues in a pilot study. InS. Göpferich, A. L. Jakobsen, & I. M. Mees (Eds.), Looking at eyes: Eye-tracking studies of reading and translation processing. (pp.53–78). Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  84. (2011) Cognitive effort in metaphor translation: An eye-tracking study. InS. O’Brien (Ed.), Cognitive explorations of translation (pp.197–214). London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  85. (2013) Cognitive effort in metaphor translation. (PhD Dissertation), Samfundslitteratur, Copenhagen.
  86. Snell-Hornby, M.
    (1995) Translation Studies: An integrated approach (2nd ed.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
     [Google Scholar]
  87. Stöckli, S., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., Borer, S., & Samson, A. C.
    (2018) Facial expression analysis with AFFDEX and FACET. Behavior Research Methods, 50, 1446–1460. doi:  10.3758/s13428‑017‑0996‑1
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0996-1 [Google Scholar]
  88. Suojanen, T., Koskinen, K., & Tuominen, T.
    (2015) User-centered translation. Abingdon: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  89. Teixeira, C. S. C., & O’Brien, S.
    (2018) Overcoming methodological challenges of eye tracking in the translation workplace. InC. Walker & F. M. Federici (Eds.), Eye-tracking and multidisciplinary studies on translation (pp.33–54). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.143.03tei
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.143.03tei [Google Scholar]
  90. Tolstoy, L.
    (1960) The death of Ivan Ilyich and other stories (R. Edmonds, Trans.). London: Penguin Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  91. (2010) The death of Ivan Ilyich and other stories (R. Pevear & L. Volokhonsky, Trans.). London: Vintage Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  92. Toury, G.
    (1995/2012) Descriptive Translation Studies – and beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.100
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.100 [Google Scholar]
  93. Tymoczko, M.
    (2012) The neuroscience of translation. Target, 24(1), 83–102. 10.1075/target.24.1.06tym
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.24.1.06tym [Google Scholar]
  94. Venuti, L.
    (2008) The translator’s invisibility. Abingdon: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  95. Walker, C.
    (2018) Towards a quantitative measurement of equivalent effect and a tentative conceptualisation of cognitive equivalence. InC. Walker & F. M. Federici (Eds.), Eye-tracking and multidisciplinary studies on translation (pp.225–258). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.143.11Wal
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.143.11Wal [Google Scholar]
  96. (2019) A cognitive perspective on equivalent effect: Using eye tracking to measure equivalence in source text and target text cognitive effects on readers. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology, 27(1), 124–143. doi:  10.1080/0907676X.2018.1449870
     https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2018.1449870 [Google Scholar]
  97. (2020) An eye-tracking study of equivalent effect in translation: The reader experience of literary style. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  98. Walker, C., & Federici, F. M.
    (Eds.) (2018) Eye-tracking and multidisciplinary studies on translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.143
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.143 [Google Scholar]
  99. Xiao, K., & Muñoz Martín, R.
    (2020) Cognitive Translation Studies: Models and methods at the cutting edge. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies, 19, 1–24.
     [Google Scholar]
  100. Ytre-Arne, B.
    (2011) ‘I Want to Hold It In My Hands’: Readers’ experiences of the phenomenological differences between women’s magazines online and in print. Media, Culture & Society, 33(3), 467–477. 10.1177/0163443711398766
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443711398766 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/cogls.00087.wal
Loading
Investigating how we read translations
Cognitive Linguistic Studies 8, 482 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1075/cogls.00087.wal
/content/journals/10.1075/cogls.00087.wal
/content/journals/10.1075/cogls.00087.wal
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): cognitive translation studies; effects; experimental study of translation; reader response; reception

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error