1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. FORUM. Revue internationale d’interprétation et de traduction / International Journal of Interpretation and Translation
  4. Volume 23, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 23, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1598-7647
  • E-ISSN: 2451-909X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Résumé

Cet article explore l’utilisation de la verbalisation rétrospective dans la formation en traduction. La verbalisation rétrospective, au même titre que les autres protocoles de processus, constitue un outil efficace pour soutenir le développement de l’autoréflexion sur le processus et le produit de traduction chez les apprentis. Les formateurs peuvent s’en servir pour évaluer l’appropriation des connaissances et repérer les pratiques et les modes de pensée problématiques. En examinant les protocoles de verbalisation rétrospective issus d’une tâche de traduction des métaphores, nous remarquons que les apprentis font preuve de conscience des problèmes de traduction et de compétences métalinguistique et autoévaluative. Cependant, les protocoles verbaux révèlent également des éléments perturbateurs susceptibles d’entraver les processus de traduction et de causer des erreurs, tels que des difficultés à caractériser les problèmes de traduction, une attention excessive portée aux formes linguistiques et un manque de confiance en soi. L’identification et l’analyse de ces éléments perturbateurs sont essentielles pour les formateurs afin de les aborder efficacement dans la formation en traduction.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/forum.25002.hon
2025-11-03
2026-07-21

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/forum.25002.hon
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Angelone, Erik
    2013 « The Impact of Process Protocol Self-Analysis on Errors in the Translation Product ». Translation and Interpreting Studies8 (2): 253–271. 10.1075/tis.8.2.07ang
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.8.2.07ang [Google Scholar]
  2. Angelone, Erik, et Gregory M. Shreve
    2011 « Uncertainty Management, Metacognitive Bundling in Problem-solving and Translation Quality ». InCognitive Explorations of Translation, édité parSharon O’Brien, 108–130. London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bernardini, Silvia
    2001 « Think-aloud protocols in translation research: Achievements, limits, future prospects ». Target13 (2): 241–263. 10.1075/target.13.2.03ber
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.13.2.03ber [Google Scholar]
  4. Buchweitz, Augusto, et Fabio Alves
    2006 « Cognitive adaptation in translation ». Letras de hoje41 (2): 241–272.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Carré, Alice
    2017 « L’analyse des processus cognitifs comme aide à la formation initiale et au perfectionnement des traducteurs ». Université Grenoble Alpes. https://theses.hal.science/tel-01823032
  6. Chesterman, Andrew
    2004 « Hypotheses about translation universals ». InClaims, changes and challenges in translation studies, édité parGyde Hansen, Kirsten Malmkjær, et Daniel Gile, 1–13. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.50.02che
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.50.02che [Google Scholar]
  7. Czulo, Oliver
    2017 « Aspects of a primacy of frame model of translation ». InEmpirical modelling oftranslation and interpreting, édité parSilvia Hansen-Schirra, Oliver Czulo, et Sascha Hofmann, 465–490. Berlin: Language Science Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Dancette, Jeanne
    2003 « Le protocole de verbalisation, un outil d’autoformation en traduction ». InLa formation à la traduction professionnelle, édité parGeneviève Mareschal, Louise Brunette, Zélie Guével, et Egan Valentine, 65–82. Ottawa: Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Deignan, Alice
    1999 « Corpus-based research into metaphor ». InReseraching and Applying Metaphor, édité parLynne Cameron et Graham Low, 177–199. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524704.012
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524704.012 [Google Scholar]
  10. Diwersy, Sascha, Vannina Goossens, Anke Grutschus, Beate Kern, Olivier Kraif, Elena Melnikova, et Iva Novakova
    2014 « Traitement des lexies d’émotion dans les corpus et les applications d’EmoBase ». Corpus, no13, 269–293. 10.4000/corpus.2537
     https://doi.org/10.4000/corpus.2537 [Google Scholar]
  11. Dodge, Ellen, Jisup Hong, et Elise Stickles
    2015 « MetaNet: Deep semantic automatic metaphor analysis ». InProceedings of the Third Workshop on Metaphor in NLP, 40–49. Denver: Association for Computational Linguistics. 10.3115/v1/W15‑1405
     https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/W15-1405 [Google Scholar]
  12. Dumarsais, César Chesneau
    1818 Les Tropes de Dumarsais. Paris: Librairie de Belin-Le Prieur.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta
    2005 Expertise and Explicitation in the Translation Process. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.64
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.64 [Google Scholar]
  14. Ericsson, K Anders, et Herbert A. Simon
    1980 « Verbal Reports as Data ». Psychological Review87 (3): 215–251. 10.1037/0033‑295X.87.3.215
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.87.3.215 [Google Scholar]
  15. Eskola, Sari
    2004 « Untypical frequencies in translated language: A corpus-based study on a literary corpus of translated and non-translated Finnish ». InTranslation universals: Do they exist?, édité parAnna Mauranen et Pekka Kujamäki, 83–99. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.48.08esk
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.48.08esk [Google Scholar]
  16. Fontanier, Pierre
    1968 Les figures du discours. Paris: Flammarion.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. García Álvarez, Ana María
    2007 « Evaluating Students’ Translation Process in Specialised Translation: Translation Commentary ». Journal of Specialised Translation, no7, 139–163. 10.26034/cm.jostrans.2007.721
     https://doi.org/10.26034/cm.jostrans.2007.721 [Google Scholar]
  18. Gile, Daniel
    2004 « Integrated Problem and Decision Reporting as a Translator Training Tool ». Journal of Specialised Translation, no2, 2–20. 10.26034/cm.jostrans.2004.805
     https://doi.org/10.26034/cm.jostrans.2004.805 [Google Scholar]
  19. Groot, Annette M. B. de
    1997 « The cognitive study of translation and interpretation: Three approaches ». InCognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting, édité parJoseph H. Danks, Gregory M. Shreve, Stephen B. Fountain, et Michael McBeath, 25–56. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Halverson, Sandra L.
    2015 « Cognitive Translation Studies and the merging of empirical paradigms: The case of ‘literal translation’ ». Translation Spaces4 (2): 310–340. 10.1075/ts.4.2.07hal
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.4.2.07hal [Google Scholar]
  21. 2019 « “Default” translation a construct for cognitive translation and interpreting studies ». Translation, Cognition and Behavior2 (2): 187–210. 10.1075/tcb.00023.hal
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tcb.00023.hal [Google Scholar]
  22. Hansen, Gyde
    2003 « Controlling the process: Theoretical and methodological reflections on research into translation processes ». InTriangulating translation: Perspectives in process oriented research, édité parFabio Alves, 25–42. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.45.05han
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.45.05han [Google Scholar]
  23. 2005 « Experience and Emotion in Empirical Translation Research with Think-Aloud and Retrospection ». Meta50 (2): 511–521. 10.7202/010997ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/010997ar [Google Scholar]
  24. 2006 « Retrospection methods in translator training and translation research ». Journal of Specialised Translation, no51, 2–41. 10.26034/cm.jostrans.2006.763
     https://doi.org/10.26034/cm.jostrans.2006.763 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hong, Wenjie
    2022 « Traduire les métaphores conceptuelles: enjeux linguistiques, cognitifs et culturels de la traduction des métaphores des émotions français-chinois et chinois-français ». Université Grenoble Alpes. https://theses.hal.science/tel-04032646
  26. Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide
    2013 « The relationship between conceptual metaphor and culture ». Intercultural Pragmatics10 (2): 315–339. 10.1515/ip‑2013‑0014
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2013-0014 [Google Scholar]
  27. Jääskeläinen, Riitta
    2002 « Think-aloud protocol studies into translation: An annotated bibliography ». Target14 (1): 107–136. 10.1075/target.14.1.05jaa
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.14.1.05jaa [Google Scholar]
  28. 2017 « Verbal Reports ». InThe Handbook of Translation and Cognition, édité parJohn W. Schwieter et Aline Ferreira, 213–231. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781119241485.ch12
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119241485.ch12 [Google Scholar]
  29. Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke
    2002 « Translation Drafting by Professional Translators and by Translation Students ». Copenhagen Studies in Language, no271, 191–204.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. 2003 « Effects of think aloud on translation speed, revision, and segmentation ». InTriangulating Translation: Perspectives in Process Oriented Research, édité parFabio Alves, 69–95. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.45.08jak
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.45.08jak [Google Scholar]
  31. 2017 « Translation Process Research ». InThe Handbook of Translation and Cognition, édité parJohn W. Schwieter et Aline Ferreira, 21–49. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781119241485.ch2
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119241485.ch2 [Google Scholar]
  32. Kövecses, Zoltán
    2004 Metaphor and Emotion: Language, Culture, and Body in Human Feeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Kroll, Judith F., et Erika Stewart
    1994 « Category Interference in Translation and Picture Naming: Evidence for Asymmetric Connections between Bilingual Memory Representations ». Journal of Memory and Language33 (2): 149–174. 10.1006/jmla.1994.1008
     https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1994.1008 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kuznik, Anna, et Christian Olalla-Soler
    2018 « Results of PACTE Group’s Experimental Research on Translation Competence Acquisition. The Acquisition of the Instrumental Sub-Competence ». Across Languages and Cultures19 (1): 19–51. 10.1556/084.2018.19.1.2
     https://doi.org/10.1556/084.2018.19.1.2 [Google Scholar]
  35. Lakoff, George, Jane Espenson, et Alan Schwartz
    1991 « Master Metaphor List ». Berkeley: University of California at Berkeley.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Lakoff, George, et Mark Johnson
    1980 Metaphors We Live By. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. 1985 Les métaphores dans la vie quotidienne [traduit de l’anglais parMichel de Fornelavec la collaboration deJean-Jacques Lecercle]. Paris: Éditions de Minuit.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Lakoff, George, et Zoltán Kövecses
    1987 « The cognitive model of anger inherent in American English ». InCultural Models in Language and Thought, édité parDorothy Holland et Naomi Quinn, 195–221. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511607660.009
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511607660.009 [Google Scholar]
  39. Lörscher, Wolfgang
    2005 « The translation process: Methods and problems of its investigation ». Meta50 (2): 597–608. 10.7202/011003ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/011003ar [Google Scholar]
  40. Maalej, Zouhair
    2004 « Figurative Language in Anger Expressions in Tunisian Arabic: An Extended View of Embodiment ». Metaphor and Symbol19 (1): 51–75. 10.1207/S15327868MS1901_3
     https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327868MS1901_3 [Google Scholar]
  41. Massey, Gary
    2017 « Translation Competence Development and Process-Oriented Pedagogy ». InThe Handbook of Translation and Cognition, édité parJohn W. Schwieter et Aline Ferreira, 496–518. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781119241485.ch27
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119241485.ch27 [Google Scholar]
  42. Meyers, Charlène
    2024 « Influence du compte-rendu intégré des problèmes et décisions (CRIPD) sur la qualité de la traduction: Analyse croisée des erreurs et des commentaires d’étudiants en traduction spécialisée » 71 (1): 44–80. 10.1075/babel.00402.mey
     https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00402.mey [Google Scholar]
  43. Muñoz Martín, Ricardo
    2010 « On paradigms and cognitive translatology ». InTranslation and Cognition, édité parGregory M. Shreve et Erik Angelone, 169–187. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ata.xv.10mun
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.xv.10mun [Google Scholar]
  44. Muñoz Martín, Ricardo, et Christian Olalla-Soler
    2022 « Translating is not (only) problem solving ». The Journal of Specialised Translation, no381, 3–31. 10.26034/cm.jostrans.2022.081
     https://doi.org/10.26034/cm.jostrans.2022.081 [Google Scholar]
  45. O’Brien, Sharon
    2013 « The borrowers: Researching the cognitive aspects of translation ». Target25 (1): 5–17. 10.1075/target.25.1.02obr
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.25.1.02obr [Google Scholar]
  46. 2023 « Human-Centered Augmented Translation: Against Antagonistic Dualisms ». Perspectives32 (3): 391–406. 10.1080/0907676X.2023.2247423
     https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2023.2247423 [Google Scholar]
  47. PACTE
    PACTE 2005 « Investigating Translation Competence: Conceptual and Methodological Issues ». Meta50 (2): 609–619. 10.7202/011004ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/011004ar [Google Scholar]
  48. Philip, Gill
    2010 « “Drugs, traffic, and many other dirty interests”: Metaphor and the language learner ». InResearching and Applying Metaphor in the Real World, édité parGraham Low, Zazie Todd, Alice Deignan, et Lynne Cameron, 63–80. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.26.05phi
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.26.05phi [Google Scholar]
  49. Rojo, Ana, et Iraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano
    éd. 2013 Cognitive Linguistics and Translation: Advances in some theoretical models and aplications. Berlin and Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110302943
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110302943 [Google Scholar]
  50. Schaeffer, Moritz, et Michael Carl
    2013 « Shared representations and the translation process: A recursive model ». Translation and Interpreting Studies8 (2): 169–190. 10.1075/tis.8.2.03sch
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.8.2.03sch [Google Scholar]
  51. Shreve, Gregory M.
    2009 « Recipient-orientation and metacognition in the translation process ». InTranslators and their readers: in homage to Eugene A. Nida, édité parRodica Dimitriu et Miriam Shlesinger, 255–270. Brussels: Hazard.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Shutova, Ekaterina, Barry J. Devereux, et Anna Korhonen
    2013 « Conceptual metaphor theory meets the data: a corpus-based human annotation study ». Language Resources and Evaluation47 (4): 1261–1284. 10.1007/s10579‑013‑9238‑z
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-013-9238-z [Google Scholar]
  53. Sickinger, Pawel
    2017 « Aiming for Cognitive Equivalence — Mental Models as a Tertium Comparationis for Translation and Empirical Semantics ». Research in Language15 (2): 213–236. 10.1515/rela‑2017‑0013
     https://doi.org/10.1515/rela-2017-0013 [Google Scholar]
  54. Soriano, Cristina
    2003 « Some Anger Metaphors in Spanish and English. a Contrastive Review ». International Journal of English Studies3 (2): 107–122. 10.6018/ijes.3.2.48381
     https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes.3.2.48381 [Google Scholar]
  55. Steen, Gerard J.
    2017 « Deliberate Metaphor Theory: Basic assumptions, main tenets, urgent issues ». Intercultural Pragmatics14 (1): 1–24. 10.1515/ip‑2017‑0001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2017-0001 [Google Scholar]
  56. Steen, Gerard J., Aletta G. Dorst, J Berenike Herrmann, Anna A. Kaal, Tina Krennmayr, et Trijntje Pasma
    2010 A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/celcr.14
     https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.14 [Google Scholar]
  57. Stefanowitsch, Anatol
    2007 « Words and their metaphors: A corpus-based approach ». InCorpus-Based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy, édité parAnatol Stefanowitsch et Stefan Th. Gries, 63–105. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110199895.63
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199895.63 [Google Scholar]
  58. Sun, Sanjun
    2011 « Think-Aloud-Based Translation Process Research: Some Methodological Considerations ». Meta56 (4): 928–951. 10.7202/1011261ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/1011261ar [Google Scholar]
  59. Sun, Sanjun, Tian Li, et Xiaoyan Zhou
    2020 « Effects of thinking aloud on cognitive effort in translation ». Linguistica Antverpiensia191:132–151. 10.52034/lanstts.v19i0.556
     https://doi.org/10.52034/lanstts.v19i0.556 [Google Scholar]
  60. Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja
    1997 « Who Verbalises What: A Linguistic Analysis of TAP Texts ». Target. International Journal of Translation Studies9 (1): 69–84. 10.1075/target.9.1.05tir
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.9.1.05tir [Google Scholar]
  61. 2005 « The monitor model revisited: Evidence from process research ». Meta50 (2): 405–414. 10.7202/010990ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/010990ar [Google Scholar]
  62. Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja, et Johanna Laukkanen
    1996 « Evaluations — a Key Towards Understanding the Affective Dimension of Translational Decisions ». Meta41 (1): 45–59. 10.7202/002360ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/002360ar [Google Scholar]
  63. Van Dijk, Teun A.
    1988 News Analysis: Case Studies of international and National News in the Press. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Whyatt, Bogusława, Olga Witczak, et Ewa Tomczak
    2021 « Information behaviour in bidirectional translators: focus on online resources ». The Interpreter and Translator Trainer15 (2): 154–171. 10.1080/1750399X.2020.1856023
     https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2020.1856023 [Google Scholar]
  65. Xun, Endong, Gaoqi Rao, Xiaoyue Xiao, et Jiaojiao Zang
    2016 « The construction of the BCC Corpus in the age of Big Data ». Corpus Linguistics3 (1): 93–109.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Yu, Ning
    1995 « Metaphorical Expressions of Anger and Happiness in English and Chinese ». Metaphor and Symbolic Activity10 (2): 59–92. 10.1207/s15327868ms1002_1
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1002_1 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/forum.25002.hon
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): formation en traduction; metaphor translation; process protocols; process-oriented pedagogy; protocoles de processus; pédagogie orientée vers le processus; retrospective verbalization; traduction des métaphores; translator training; verbalisation rétrospective

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