1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Translation Spaces
  4. Volume 9, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 9, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2211-3711
  • E-ISSN: 2211-372X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

For over two decades, Translation Studies (TS) scholars have argued that the discipline is going through a ‘technological turn’. This paper critically questions whether TS has already completed this “paradigmatic” or “disciplinary turn,” “a clearly visible and striking” change of direction that can “perhaps even [amount] to a redefinition of the subject concerned” (Snell-Hornby 2010, 366). After a revision of the notion of ‘turn’ in TS, it will be argued that the ‘technological’ one has been completed and it can, in fact, be assessed “after it is already complete” (ibid). It will be shown how the emergence and consolidation of this turn were “driven not by theoretical developments in cognate areas of inquiry,” but are an “emergent property from new forms of translation practice” (Cronin 2010, 1). As a consequence, it has permeated TS across its different subdisciplines, both in their theoretical apparatus and/or in their research methodologies. In this examination, the picture that emerges is that translation, across TS, has in fact been redefined in one way or another as an instance of “human-computer interaction,” even in contexts such as literary translation.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ts.19012.jim
2021-01-07
2024-09-09

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ts.19012.jim
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abuczki, Ágnes , Nijolė Burkšaitienė , Ludivine Crible , Anna Nedoluzhko , Péter Furkó , Giedre Valūnaitė Oleškevičienė , Sigita Rackevičienė , and Šárka Zikánová
    2018 “Translation of ‘And’ in a Parallel TED Talk Corpus of English, Czech, Hungarian, Lithuanian and French: Functions and Omissions.” Proceedings of Cross-linguistic Discourse Annotation: Applications and Perspectives (TextLink2018), 4–8. AccessedAugust 17, 2020. textlink.ii.metu.edu.tr/sites/default/files/textlink_proceedings.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Alcina, Amparo
    2008 “Translation Technologies: Scope, Tools and Resources.” Target20: 79–102. 10.1075/target.20.1.05alc
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.20.1.05alc [Google Scholar]
  3. Alonso, Elisa and Elisa Calvo
    2015 “Developing a Blueprint for a Technology-Mediated Approach to Translation Studies.” Meta : journal des traducteurs / Meta: Translators’ Journal60 (1): 135–157. 10.7202/1032403ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/1032403ar [Google Scholar]
  4. Alves, Fabio and Daniel Couto Vale
    2011 “On Drafting and Revision in Translation: A Corpus Linguistics-Oriented Analysis of Translation Process Data.” InTranslation: Corpora, Computation, Cognition. Special issue on parallel corpora: Annotation, exploitation, evaluation of parallel corpora, edited by Silvia Hansen-Schirra , Stella Neumann and Oliver Čulo , 89–110. Berlin: Language Science Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Alves, Fabio and Amparo Hurtado
    2017 “Evolution, Challenges, and Perspectives for Research on Cognitive Aspects of Translation.” InThe Handbook of Translation and Cognition, edited by John W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira , 537–555. New York and London: Routledge. 10.1002/9781119241485.ch29
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119241485.ch29 [Google Scholar]
  6. Angelone, Erik , Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen and Gary Massey
    2019 The Bloomsbury Companion to Language Industry Studies. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Aragones Lumeras, Ester and Andy Way
    2017 “On the Complementarity between Human Translators and Machine.” Hermes. Journal of Language and Communication in Business56: 21–42. 10.7146/hjlcb.v0i56.97200
     https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.v0i56.97200 [Google Scholar]
  8. Aston, Guy
    2018 “Acquiring the Language of Interpreters: A Corpus-based Approach.” InMaking Way in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies, edited by Mariachiara Russo , Claudio Bandazzoli and Bart DeFrancq , 83–96. Berlin: Springer. doi:  10.1007/978‑981‑10‑6199‑8_5
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6199-8_5 [Google Scholar]
  9. Austermühl, Frank
    2001 Electronic Tools for Translators. Manchester: St. Jerome.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Bassnett, Susan and André Lefevere
    1991 Translation, History and Culture. London: Pinter Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Bernardini, Silvia , Adriano Ferraresi , Marichiara Russo , Camille Collard and Bart Defrancq
    2018 “Building Interpreting and Intermodal Corpora: A How-to for a Formidable Task.” InNew Frontiers in Translation Studies: Making Way in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies, edited by Marichiara Russo , Claudio Bendazzoli and Bart Defrancq , 21–42. Singapore: Springer. 10.1007/978‑981‑10‑6199‑8_2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6199-8_2 [Google Scholar]
  12. Biau, José R.
    2006 “Teaching Electronic Tools for Translators Online.” InTranslation Technology and its Teaching, edited by Anthony Pym , Alexander Perestrenko and Bram Starink , 89–96. Tarragona: Intercultural Studies Group, Universitat Rovira i Virgili.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Biel, Łucja and Vielmini Sosoni
    2017 “The Translation of Economics and the Economics of Translation.” Perspectives25 (3): 351–361. 10.1080/0907676X.2017.1313281
     https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2017.1313281 [Google Scholar]
  14. Bowker, Lynne
    2002 Computer-Aided Translation Technology. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Bowker, Lynne and Gloria Corpas
    2015 “Translation Technology.” InThe Handbook of Computational Linguistics, edited by Ruslan Mitkov . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Bowker, Lynne and Tom Delsey
    2016 “Information Science, Terminology and Translation Studies: Adaptation, Collaboration, Integration.” InBorder Crossing: Translation Studies and Other Disciplines, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc Van Doorslaer , 73–96. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.126.04bow
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.126.04bow [Google Scholar]
  17. Bundgaard, Kristine
    2017 “Translator Attitudes towards Translator-Computer Interaction – Findings from a Workplace Study.” HERMES – Journal of Language and Communication in Business56: 125–144. doi:  10.7146/hjlcb.v0i56.97228
     https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.v0i56.97228 [Google Scholar]
  18. Braun, Sabine
    2015 “Remote Interpreting.” InThe Handbook of Interpreting, edited by Holly Mikkelson and Renee Jourdains , 352–367. New York and London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Bywood, Lyndsay , Panayota Georgakopoulou and Thierry Etchegoyhen
    2017 “Embracing the Threat: Machine Translation as a Solution for Subtitling.” Perspectives25 (3): 492–508. 10.1080/0907676X.2017.1291695
     https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2017.1291695 [Google Scholar]
  20. Camara, Lidia
    2015 “Motivation for Collaboration in TED Open Translation.” International Journal of Web-Based Communication11 (2): 210–229.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Chan, Sin-wai
    (2007) “Taking a technological turn: the making of A Dictionary of Translation Technology.” 翻譯學報10(1): 113–130.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. (ed) 2014 The Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Technology. New York and London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315749129
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315749129 [Google Scholar]
  23. (ed.) 2018 The Human Factor in Machine Translation. New York and London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Chaume, Frederic
    2018 “An Overview of Audiovisual Translation: Four Methodological Turns in a Mature discipline.” Journal of Audiovisual Translation1 (1): 40–63. 10.47476/jat.v1i1.43
     https://doi.org/10.47476/jat.v1i1.43 [Google Scholar]
  25. Chesterman, Andrew
    2018 “Moving Conceptual Boundaries: So What?” InMoving Boundaries in Translation Studies, edited by Helle Van Dam , Matilde Brogger and Karen Zethsen , 12–25. New York and London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315121871‑2
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315121871-2 [Google Scholar]
  26. Christensen, Tina P. , Marian Flanagan , and Anne Schjoldager
    2017 “Mapping Translation Technology Research into Translation Studies: An Introduction to the Thematic Section.” Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication in Business56: 7–20. 10.7146/hjlcb.v0i56.97199
     https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.v0i56.97199 [Google Scholar]
  27. Cronin, Michael
    2003 Translation and Globalization. New York and London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. 2010 ‘The Translation Crowd.’ Tradumática, 8. www.fti.uab.es/tradumatica/revista/num8/articles/04/04central.htm. 10.5565/rev/tradumatica.100
     https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/tradumatica.100 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2013 Translation in the Digital Age. New York and London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Doherty, Stephen
    2012 “Investigating the Effects of Controlled Language on the Reading and Comprehension of Machine Translated Texts: A Mixed-Methods Approach Using Eye Tracking.” PhD Dissertation. Dublin City University.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. 2016 “The Impact of Translation Technologies on the Process and Product of Translation.” International Journal of Communication Studies9: 1–23.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Doherty, Stephen and Jean L. Kruger
    2018a “Development of Eye Tracking.” InThe Seeing into Screens: Eye Tracking and the Moving Image, edited by Tessa Dwyer , Claire Perkins , Sean Redmond and Jodi Sita , 46–64. London and New York: Bloomsbury. 10.5040/9781501329012.0009
     https://doi.org/10.5040/9781501329012.0009 [Google Scholar]
  33. 2018b “Assessing Quality in Human-and Machine-Generated Subtitles and Captions Translation Quality Assessment.” InTranslation Quality Assessment, edited by Joss Moorkens , Sheila Castilho , Federico Gaspari and Stephen Doherty , 179–197. Singapore: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑91241‑7_9
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91241-7_9 [Google Scholar]
  34. Dombek, Magdalena
    2014 “A Study into the Motivations of Internet Users Contributing to Translation Crowdsourcing: The Case of Polish Facebook User-Translators.” Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Dublin City University.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Dunne, Keiran
    2006 “A Copernican Revolution.” InPerspectives on Localization, edited by Keiran Dunne , 1–11. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ata.xiii.01dun
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.xiii.01dun [Google Scholar]
  36. Dragsted, Barbara
    2006 “Computer-Aided Translation as a Distributed Cognitive Task.” Pragmatics and Cognition14 (2): 443–464. 10.1075/pc.14.2.17dra
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.14.2.17dra [Google Scholar]
  37. Fantinuoli, Claudio
    2018 “Interpreting and Technology: The Upcoming Technological Turn.” InInterpreting and Technology, edited by Claudio Fantinuoli , 1–12. Berlin: Language Science Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Flynn, Peter and Yves Gambier
    2011 “Methodology in Translation Studies.” InThe Handbook of Translation Studies, vol. 2, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc Van Doorslaer , 88–96. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hts.2.met2
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hts.2.met2 [Google Scholar]
  39. Folaron, Debbie
    2006 “A Discipline Coming of Age in the Digital Age. Perspectives on localization.” InPerspectives in Localization, edited by Keiran Dunne , 195–222. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ata.xiii.16fol
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.xiii.16fol [Google Scholar]
  40. 2010 “Networking and Volunteer Translators.” InThe Handbook of Translation Studies, vol. 1, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer , 231–234. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hts.1.net1
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hts.1.net1 [Google Scholar]
  41. Gambier, Yves
    2001 (Multi) Media Translation: Concepts, Practices and Research. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.34
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.34 [Google Scholar]
  42. Gambier, Yves and Luc van Doorslaer
    2016 Border Crossings: Translation Studies and Other Disciplines. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.126
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.126 [Google Scholar]
  43. Ghassemiazghandi, Mozhgan and Tengku Mahadi
    2018 “Quality Estimation of Machine Translation for Literature.” InThe Human Factor in Machine Translation, edited by Sin-Wai Chan , 183–208. New York and London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315147536‑11
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315147536-11 [Google Scholar]
  44. Gile, Daniel
    2004 “Response to Invited Papers.” Translation Research and Interpreting Research, edited by Cristina Schäffner , 124–127. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781853597350‑015
     https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853597350-015 [Google Scholar]
  45. Halverson, Sandra
    2016 “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]
  46. Hermans, Theo
    2013 “What is Not Translation?” InThe Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Carmen Millán-Varela and Federica Bartrina , 75–87. New York and London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Holmes, James
    (1988) 2000 “The Name and the Nature of Translation Studies.” InThe Translation Studies Reader, edited by Lawrence Venuti , 172–185. New York and London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Hvelplund, Kristian T. and Barbara Dragsted
    2018 “Genre Familiarity and Translation Processing.” InInnovation and Expansion in Translation Process Research, edited by Isabel Lacruz and Rita Jaakelainen , 55–76. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ata.18.04tan
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.18.04tan [Google Scholar]
  49. Irribarren, Teresa
    2018 “Subaltern Mediators in the Digital Landscape.” Target29 (2): 319–338. 10.1075/target.29.2.07iri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.29.2.07iri [Google Scholar]
  50. Ji, Meng
    2012 “Hypothesis Testing in Corpus-Based Literary Translation Studies.” InQuantitative Methods in Corpus-Based Translation Studies, edited by Michael Oakes and Meng Ji , 53–72. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.51.03ji
     https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.51.03ji [Google Scholar]
  51. Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A.
    2009 “The Effect of Translation Memory Tools in Translated Web Texts: Evidence from a Comparative Product-Based Study.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, 8: 213–232.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. 2013 Translation and Web Localization. New York and London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203520208
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203520208 [Google Scholar]
  53. 2017a Crowdsourcing and Online Collaborative Translations: Expanding the Limits of Translation Studies. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.131
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.131 [Google Scholar]
  54. 2017b “Mobile Apps and translation Crowdsourcing: The Next Frontier in the Evolution of Translation.” Tradumática14: 75–84. AccessedAugust 17, 2020. revistes.uab.cat/tradumatica/article/view/167/pdf_31
     [Google Scholar]
  55. 2018 “Localization Research in Translation Studies: Moving Expanding the Limits or Blurring the Line.” InMoving Boundaries in Translation Studies, edited by Helle Van Dam , Matilde Brogger and Karen Korning Zethsen , 12–25. New York and Amsterdam: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. 2020 “Localization.” InThe Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, Mona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha , 299–304. New York and London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel and Maribel Tercedor
    2012 “Applying Corpus Data to Define Needs in Web Localization Training.” Meta : journal des traducteurs / Meta: Translators’ Journal58 (2): 998–1021. 10.7202/1011264ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/1011264ar [Google Scholar]
  58. Jiménez-Serrano, Oscar
    2019 “Tecnologías de la interpretación. Introducción.” Tradumatica17: 20–32.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Kenny, Dorothy
    (ed) 2017 Human Issues in Translation Technology. New York and London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315648934
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315648934 [Google Scholar]
  60. 2001 Lexis and Creativity in Translation. New York and London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Kruger, Jean L. , Doherty, Stephen , Fox, Wendy , and de Lissa, Peter
    2018 “Multimodal Measurement of Cognitive Load During Subtitle Processing: Same-Language Subtitles for Foreign Language Viewers.” InNew Directions in Cognitive and Empirical Translation Process Research, edited by Isabel Lacruz and Ritta Jääskeläinen , 267–294. London: John Benjamins.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Kozinets, Robert V.
    2010 Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online. London: SAGE.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Latour, Bruno
    2005 Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Lave, Jean and Etienne Wenger
    1991 Situated Learning. Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511815355
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355 [Google Scholar]
  65. Laviosa, Sara
    2002 Computer-based Translation Studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Leontiev, Aleksej
    1987 Activity, Consciousness, and Personality. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Liang, Wayne Wen-Chu
    2016 “Translators’ behaviors from a Sociological Perspective – A Parallel Corpus Study of Fantasy Fiction Translation in Taiwan.” Babel62 (1): 39–66. 10.1075/babel.62.1.03lia
     https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.62.1.03lia [Google Scholar]
  68. Littau, Karin
    2016 “Translation and the Materialities of Communication.” Translation Studies9 (1): 82–96. 10.1080/14781700.2015.1063449
     https://doi.org/10.1080/14781700.2015.1063449 [Google Scholar]
  69. Loffredo, Eugenia and Manuela Perteghella
    2006 Translation and Creativity: Perspectives on Creative Writing and Translation Studies. New York: Bloomsbury.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Lagoudaki, Elina
    2006 “Translation Memories Survey 2006. Users’ Perceptions Around TM Use.” InTranslation and the Computer, edited byASLIB, 28: 1–29. London, England. AccessedAugust 17, 2020. mt-archive.info/Aslib-2006-Lagoudaki.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Leblanc, Matthieu
    2013 “Translators on Translation Memory (TM). Results of an Ethnographic Study in Three Translation Services and Agencies.” Translation and Interpreting5 (2): 1–13.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Malmkjaer, Kirsten
    2013 “Where are We? From Holmes Map until Now.” InThe Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Carmen Millán-Varela and Federica Bartrina , 31–44. New York and London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Marais, Kobus
    2014 Translation Theory and Development Studies: A Complexity Theory Approach. New York and London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203768280
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203768280 [Google Scholar]
  74. Martín-Mor, Adriá
    2012 “Valoració d’un Curs de Tecnologies de la Traducció a distància.” Tradumàtica10: 230–236.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Mayoral, Ricardo
    1997 “Sincronización y Traducción Subordinada: De la Traducción Audiovisual a la Localización de Software y su Integración en la Traducción de Productos Multimedia.” InProceedings of the First Symposium on Multimedia Localization, edited by Ricardo Mayoral and Antonio Tejada . Granada: Departamento de Lingüística Aplicada a la Traducción e Interpretación. AccessedAugust 17, 2020. www.ugr.es/~rasensio/docs/Multimedia_.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  76. McDonough-Dolmaya, Julie
    2011 “A Window into the Profession: What Translation Blogs Have to Offer Translation Studies.” The Translator17(1): 77–104. 10.1080/13556509.2011.10799480
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2011.10799480 [Google Scholar]
  77. 2012 “Analyzing the Crowdsourcing Model and its Impact on Public Perceptions of Translation.” The Translator182: 167–191. 10.1080/13556509.2012.10799507
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2012.10799507 [Google Scholar]
  78. 2018” “Mapping Translation Blog Networks and Communities.” InMoving Boundaries in Translation Studies, edited by Helle Van Dam , Matilde Brogger and Karen Zethsen , 98–112. New York-London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315121871‑7
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315121871-7 [Google Scholar]
  79. Melby, Alan and Terry Warner
    1995 The Possibility of Language: A Discussion of the Nature of Language, with Implications for Human and Machine Translation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.14
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.14 [Google Scholar]
  80. Mellinger, Chris and Nike Pokorn
    2018 “Community Interpreting, Translation and Technology.” Translation and Interpreting Studies13 (3): 337–341. 10.1075/tis.00019.int
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.00019.int [Google Scholar]
  81. Mesipuu, Maarit
    2012 “Translation Crowdsourcing and User-Translator Motivation at Facebook and Skype.” Translation Spaces1: 33–53. 10.1075/ts.1.03mes
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.1.03mes [Google Scholar]
  82. Moorkens, Joss
    2018 “Eye Tracking as a Measure of Cognitive Effort for Post-editing Machine Translation.” InEye Tracking and Multidisciplinary Studies on Translation, edited by Callum Walker and Federico M. Federici , 55–70. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.143.04moo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.143.04moo [Google Scholar]
  83. Moorkens, Joss and Sharon O’Brien
    2017 “Assessing User Interface Needs of Post-Editors of Machine Translation.” InHuman Issues in Translation Technology, edited by Dorothy Kenny , 109–130. London and New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  84. Moorkens, Joss , Antonio Toral , Sheila Castilho , and Andy Way
    2018 “Translators’ Perceptions of Literary Post-editing Using Statistical and Neural Machine Translation.” Translation Spaces7 (2): 240–262. doi:  10.1075/ts.18014.moo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.18014.moo [Google Scholar]
  85. Munday, Jeremy
    2008 Introducing Translation Studies. New York and London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  86. O’Brien, Sharon
    2008 “Processing Fuzzy Matches in Translation Memory Tools: An Eye-tracking Analysis.” InLooking at Eyes. Eye-tracking Studies of Reading and Translation Processing, edited by Susanne Göpferich , Arnt Lykke Jakobsen , Inger M. Mees , 79–102. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.
     [Google Scholar]
  87. 2012 “Translation as Human-Computer Interaction.” Translation Spaces1: 101–122. 10.1075/ts.1.05obr
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.1.05obr [Google Scholar]
  88. 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]
  89. O’Brien, Sharon and Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow
    2015 “Ergonomics of the Translation Workplace: Potential for Cognitive Friction.” Translation Spaces4 (1): 98–118. 10.1075/ts.4.1.05ehr
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.4.1.05ehr [Google Scholar]
  90. O’Brien, Sharon and Owen Conlan
    2018 “Moving Towards Personalising Translation Technology.” InMoving Boundaries in Translation Studies, edited by Helle Van Dam , Matilde Brogger and Karen Zethsen , 81–97. New York and London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315121871‑6
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315121871-6 [Google Scholar]
  91. O’Brien, Sharon , Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow , Megan Connolly and Marcel Hasler
    2017 “Irritating CAT Tools Features that Matters to Translators.” Hermes56: 145–162.
     [Google Scholar]
  92. O’Hagan, Minako
    1996 Coming Industry of Teletranslation. London: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  93. 2013 “The Impact of New Technologies on Translation Studies: A Technological Turn?” InThe Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Carmen Millán-Varela and Francesca Bartrina , 503–518. New York and London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  94. 2016 “Massively Open Translation: Unpacking the Relationship Between Technology and Translation in the 21st Century.” International Journal of Communication10 (2016): 929–946.
     [Google Scholar]
  95. 2017 “Deconstructing Translation Crowdsourcing with the Case of A Facebook Initiative: A Translation Network of Engineered Autonomy and Trust?” InHuman Issues in Translation Technology, edited by Dorothy Kenny , 25–44. Florence, US: Taylor and Francis.
     [Google Scholar]
  96. (ed) 2020 The Routledge Handbook of Translation Technology. New York and London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  97. O’Hagan, Minako and Carmen Mangiron
    2014 Videogame Localization. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
     [Google Scholar]
  98. Olohan, Maeve
    2011 “Translators and Translation Technology: The Dance of Agency.” Translation Studies4(3): 342–357. 10.1080/14781700.2011.589656
     https://doi.org/10.1080/14781700.2011.589656 [Google Scholar]
  99. 2014 “Why do you Translate? Motivation to Volunteer and TED translation.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology7 (1): 17–33.
     [Google Scholar]
  100. 2017 “Technology, Translation and Society: A Constructivist, Critical Theory Approach.” Target29 (2): 264–283. 10.1075/target.29.2.04olo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.29.2.04olo [Google Scholar]
  101. Olvera-Lobo, María Dolores , Bryan Robinson , Jose Senso , Ricardo Muñoz Martín , Eva Muñoz-Raya , Miguel Murillo-Melero , Enrique Quero-Gervilla , Rosa Castro-Prieto , and Tomás Conde-Ruano
    2009 “Teleworking and Collaborative Work Environments in Translation Training.” Babel55 (2): 165–180. doi:  10.1075/babel.55.2.05olv
     https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.55.2.05olv [Google Scholar]
  102. Orrego-Carmona, David
    2011 “The Empirical Study of Non-Professional Subtitling: A Descriptive Approach.” MA Dissertation. Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain.
     [Google Scholar]
  103. Pavesi, Maria
    2018 “Corpus-based Audiovisual Translation Studies: Ample Room for Development.” InThe Handbook of Audiovisual Translation Studies, edited by Luis Pérez-González , 315–333. New York and London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315717166‑20
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315717166-20 [Google Scholar]
  104. Pickering, Andrew
    1995 The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency and Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226668253.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226668253.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  105. Pérez-González, Luis
    2018 “Rewiring the Circuitry of Audiovisual Translation: Introduction.” InThe Routledge Handbook of Audiovisual Translation, edited by Luis Pérez-González , 1–12. New York and London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315717166‑1
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315717166-1 [Google Scholar]
  106. Pym, Anthony
    2004 The Moving Text: Localization, Translation and Distribution. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.49
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.49 [Google Scholar]
  107. 2010 Translation Theories Explained. London and New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  108. Quah, Chiew Kin
    2006 Translation and Technology. Houndmills and New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230287105
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230287105 [Google Scholar]
  109. Reineke, Detlef
    (ed) 2005 Traducción y Localización. La Palmas de Gran Canaria: Anroart Ediciones.
     [Google Scholar]
  110. Remael, Aline
    2010 “Audiovisual Translation.” InThe Handbook of Translation Studies, vol. 1, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer , 12–17. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hts.1.aud1
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hts.1.aud1 [Google Scholar]
  111. Risku, Hanna
    2014 “Translation Process Research as Interaction Research: From Mental to Sociocognitive Processes.” Minding Translation – MonTI Special Issue1: 331–353.
     [Google Scholar]
  112. Risku, Hanna and Angela Dickinson
    2009 “Translators as Networkers: The Role of Virtual Communities.” Hermes42: 49–70.
     [Google Scholar]
  113. Risku, Hanna and Florian Windhanger
    2013 “Extended Translation: A Sociocognitive Research Agenda.” Target13: 33–45. 10.1075/target.25.1.04ris
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.25.1.04ris [Google Scholar]
  114. Risku, Hanna , Regina Rogl and Christina Pein-Weber
    2016 “Mutual Dependencies: Centrality in Translation Networks.” Jostrans: The Journal of Specialized Translation25: 1–22. AccessedAugust 17, 2020. www.jostrans.org/issue25/art_risku.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  115. Roukonen, Kaisa and Minna Koskinen
    2017 “Dancing with Technology: Translators Narratives on the Dance of Human and Machine Agency in Translation Work.” The Translator23 (3): 310–323. doi:  10.1080/13556509.2017.1301846
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2017.1301846 [Google Scholar]
  116. Ruano, Pablo
    2017 “Corpus Methodologies in Literary Translation Studies: An Analysis of Speech Verbs in Four Spanish Translations of Hard Times.” Meta : journal des traducteurs / Meta: Translators’ Journal62 (1): 94–113. 10.7202/1040468ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/1040468ar [Google Scholar]
  117. Rundle, Christopher and Vicente Rafael
    2016 “History and Translation.” InBorder Crossings: Translation Studies and Other Disciplines, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer , 23–48. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.126.02run
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.126.02run [Google Scholar]
  118. Saldanha, Gabriela
    2009 “Linguistic Approaches.” InRoutledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, 2nd edition, edited by Mona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha , 148–52. London and New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  119. Sandrini, Peter
    2016 “Towards a Digital Translation Policy.” InLanguage in the Digital Era. Challenges and Perspectives, edited by Daniel Dejica , ‎Gyde Hansen and ‎Peter Sandrini , 50–59. Berlin: De Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  120. Secară, Alina , Merten, Pescalin and Yamile Ramírez
    2009 “What’s in Your Blend? Creating Blended Resources for Translator Training.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer3 (2): 275–294.
     [Google Scholar]
  121. Snell-Hornby, Mary
    2006 The Turns of Translation Studies. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.66
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.66 [Google Scholar]
  122. 2010 “The Turns in Translation Studies.” InThe Handbook of Translation Studies, vol. 1, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer , 366–370. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. 10.1075/hts.1.tur1
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hts.1.tur1 [Google Scholar]
  123. Teixeira, Carlos and Sharon O’Brien
    2018 “Overcoming Methodological Challenges of Eye Tracking in the Translation Workspace.” InEye Tracking and Multidisciplinary Studies on Translation, edited by Callum Walker and Federico M. Federici , 33–54. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.143.03tei
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.143.03tei [Google Scholar]
  124. Toral, Antonio and Andy Way
    2014 “Machine-Assisted Translation of Literary Text: A Case Study.” Translation Spaces4 (2): 240–267. 10.1075/ts.4.2.04tor
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.4.2.04tor [Google Scholar]
  125. 2018 “What Level of Quality can Neural Machine Translation Attain on Literary Text?” InTranslation Quality Assessment: From Principles to Practice, edited by Joss Moorkens , Sheila Castilho , Federico Gaspari and Stephen Doherty , 263–287. New York: Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑91241‑7_12
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91241-7_12 [Google Scholar]
  126. Van Dam, Helle , Matile Brogger , and Karen Zethsen
    (eds) 2018 Moving Boundaries in Translation Studies. New York and London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  127. Vandepitte, Sonia
    2017 “Recognizing Social Aspects of Translation.” InThe Handbook of Translation and Cognition, edited by John W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira , 165–175. New York and London: Routledge. 10.1002/9781119241485.ch9
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119241485.ch9 [Google Scholar]
  128. Vasconcellos, Muriel
    1988 Technology as Translation Strategy. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ata.ii
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.ii [Google Scholar]
  129. Wolf, Michaela
    2007 “Introduction: The Emergence of a Sociology of Translation.” InConstructing a Sociology of Translation, edited Michaela Wolf and Alexandra Fukari , 1–36. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.74.01wol
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.74.01wol [Google Scholar]
  130. 2017 “A ‘Performative Turn’ in Translation Studies? Reflections from a Sociological Perspective.” Translation and Performance9(1): 27–44.
     [Google Scholar]
  131. Wolf, Michaela and Alexandra Fukari
    (eds) 2007 Constructing a Sociology of Translation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.74
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.74 [Google Scholar]
  132. Youdale, Roy
    2019 Using Technology in the Translation of Literary Style: Challenges and Opportunities. New York and London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429030345
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429030345 [Google Scholar]
  133. Zanettin, Federico
    2017 “Issues in Computer-Assisted Literary Translation Studies.” Intralinea. Special Issue: Corpora and Literary Translation Issues in Computer-Assisted Literary Translation Studies 2017. AccessedAugust 17, 2020. www.intralinea.org/specials/article/issues_in_computer_assisted_literary_translation_studies
     [Google Scholar]
  134. Zubillaga, Zuriñe , Naroa Uribarri and Ibon Sanz
    2015 “Building a Trilingual Parallel Corpus to Analyse Literary Translations from German into Basque.” InNew Directions in Corpus-based Translation Studies, edited by Claudio Fantinuoli and Federico Zanettin , Berlin: Language Science Press.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/ts.19012.jim
Loading
The “technological turn” in translation studies
Translation Spaces 9, 314 (2020); https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.19012.jim
/content/journals/10.1075/ts.19012.jim
/content/journals/10.1075/ts.19012.jim
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): technological turn; translation technology; translation theory; translation turns

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