Volume 18, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1598-7647
  • E-ISSN: 2451-909X
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



The present article aims at presenting the results of an exploratory post-editing process study carried out in a Belgian university, the University of Mons. For this experiment, 64 final-year translation students with no post-editing experience post-edited from English into French parts of five different institutional texts from the Directorate-General for Translation (DGT) of the European Commission. They were additionally asked to fill in a prospective questionnaire and a retrospective one, related to their post-editing perception and strategies. Four students took part in the experiment on a separate computer equipped with an eye-tracking device, so that eye-tracking data could be collected and compared with these students’ questionnaires. We found that results related to eye-tracking data correlate well with previous research, and that students’ perceptions of post-editing depend on each university’s particular context.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Cadwell, Patrick, Sheila Castilho, Sharon O’Brien, and Linda Mitchell
    2016 “Human Factors in Machine Translation and Post-Editing among Institutional Translators.” Translation Spaces5 (2): 222–243. 10.1075/ts.5.2.04cad
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.5.2.04cad [Google Scholar]
  2. Carl, Michael, Barbara Dragsted, Jakob Elming, Daniel Hardt, and Arnt L. Jakobsen
    2011 “The Process of Post-Editing: a Pilot Study.” Proceedings of the 8th international NLPSC workshop.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Carl, Michael, Silke Gutermuth, and Silvia Hansen-Schirra
    2015 “Post-editing machine translation: Efficiency, strategies, and revision processes in professional translation settings.” InPsycholinguistic and Cognitive Inquiries into Translation and Interpreting, ed. byAline Ferreira and John W. Schwieter, 145–174. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. DGT-Spanish Language Department
    DGT-Spanish Language Department 2010Manual de revisión. Brussels / Luxembourg.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. EMT expert group
    EMT expert group 2017 “Competence framework 2017”. European Commission, Brussels.
  6. Fiederer, Rebecca, and Sharon O’Brien
    2009 “Quality and Machine Translation: a Realistic Objective?” The Journal of Specialised Translation11: 52–74.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Forcada, Mikel
    2017 “Making Sense of Neural Machine Translation.” Translation Spaces6 (2): 291–309. 10.1075/ts.6.2.06for
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.6.2.06for [Google Scholar]
  8. Garcia, Ignacio
    2011 “Translating by Post-Editing: Is It the Way Forward?” Machine Translation25: 217–237. 10.1007/s10590‑011‑9115‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10590-011-9115-8 [Google Scholar]
  9. Guerberof Arenas, Ana
    2009 “Productivity and Quality in the Post-Editing of Outputs from Translation Memories and Machine Translation.” Localisation Focus – The International Journal of Localisation7 (1): 11–21.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Jia, Yanfang, Michael Carl, and Xiangling Wang
    2019 “How Does the Post-Editing of Neural Machine Translation Compare with From-Scratch Translation? A Product and Process Study.” The Journal of Specialised Translation31: 60–86.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Koponen, Maarit
    2012 “Comparing Human Perceptions of Post-editing Effort with Post-editing Operations.” Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation: 181–190.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Koponen, Maarit, Wilker Aziz, Luciana Ramos, and Lucia Specia
    2012 “Post-Editing Time as a Measure of Cognitive Effort.” Proceedings of the AMTA 2012 Workshop on Post-editing Technology and Practice: 11–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Krings, Hans
    2001Repairing Texts: Empirical Investigations of Machine Translation Post-Editing Processes. Kent (Ohio): The Kent State University Press, Kent.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Laurian, Anne-Marie
    1984 “Machine Translation : What Type of Post-editing on What Type of Documents for What Type of Users.” Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 22nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: 236–238.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Mesa-Lao, Bartolomé
    2014 “Gaze Behaviour on Source Texts: an Exploratory Study Comparing Translation and Post-Editing.” InPost-editing of Machine Translation: Processes and applications, ed. bySharon O’Brien, Laura Winther Balling, Michael Carl, Michel Simard, and Lucia Specia, 219–245. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. O’Brien, Sharon
    2002 “Teaching Post-editing: a Proposal for Course Content.” 6th EAMT Workshop – Teaching Machine Translation: 99–106.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Plitt, Mirko, and François Masselot
    2010 “A Productivity Test of Statistical Machine Translation Post-Editing in a Typical Localisation Context.” The Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics93: 7–16. 10.2478/v10108‑010‑0010‑x
    https://doi.org/10.2478/v10108-010-0010-x [Google Scholar]
  18. Robert, Anne-Marie
    2010 “La post-édition : l’avenir incontournable du traducteur  ?” Traduire – Revue française de la traduction222: 137–144.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. (2013) “Vous avez dit post-éditrice ? Quelques éléments d’un parcours personnel.” The Journal of Specialised Translation19: 29–40.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Rossi, Caroline
    2019 “L’apprenti traducteur et la machine : des connaissances aux perceptions de la traduction automatique.” Des mots aux actes8: 93-105.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. TAUS
  22. Toral, Antonio, Martin Wieling, and Andy Way
    2018 “Post-editing Effort of a Novel With Statistical and Neural Machine Translation”. Frontiers in Digital Humanities5 (9): 1–11.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Valero-Garcés, Carmen
    2018 “Interview with Spanish Language Department. Directorate-General for Translation (DGT) European Commission. José Luis Vega (Head of Department); Alberto Rivas (Quality Officer) and Luis González (Terminologist).” FITISPos International Journal5 (1): 114–122.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Vieira, Lucas N.
    2017 “From Process to Product: Links between Post-Editing Effort and Post-Edited Quality.” InTranslation in transition: between cognition, computing and technology, ed. byArnt L. Jakobsen, and Bartolomé Mesa-Lao, 162–186. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.133.06vie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.133.06vie [Google Scholar]
  25. Wagner, Emma
    1985 “Post-Editing SYSTRAN – A Challenge for Commission Translators.” Terminologie et Traduction3: 1–7.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

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