Cognitive space: Exploring the situational interface
  • ISSN 2211-3711
  • E-ISSN: 2211-372X
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


In a language services industry currently feeling the pressure of ever-faster translation turn-around times, Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) offers a variety of advantages for professional translators, yet also presents challenges. Anecdotal evidence shared on translators’ community platforms support the former, but the latter has not received as much attention. This paper reports insights into professional translation practices with ASR, based upon a survey on the use of ASR as well as a study in a naturalistic setting. By examining which translation tasks professionals have been using ASR for, how successfully, and in which workflows, this article highlights some of the main advantages and disadvantages of ASR adoption in the professional translation world. The conclusion is that ASR has the potential to increase the productivity and creativity of the translation act, but the advantages can be overshadowed by a reduction in translation quality unless thorough revision processes are in place.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Agrifoglio, Marjorie
    2004 “Sight Translation and Interpreting: A Comparative Analysis of Constraints and Failures.” Interpreting6 (1): 43–67. doi: 10.1075/intp.6.1.05agr
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.6.1.05agr [Google Scholar]
  2. Alabau, Vincent , and Luis A. Leiva
    2014 “Proofreading Human Translations with an E-pen.” In Proceedings of the EACL 2014 Workshop on Humans and Computer-Assisted Translation , 10–15. Gothenburg: Association for Computational Linguistics. doi: 10.3115/v1/W14‑0302
    https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/W14-0302 [Google Scholar]
  3. Aparicio, Antonio , Michael Benis , and Graham Cross
    2001 “ITI 2001 Rates and Salaries Survey.” London: Institute of Translation and Interpreting.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bangalore, Srinivas
    2014 “Speech Technology and Computer Assisted Translation.” Presentation at the International Workshop on Translation, Bilingualism and Translation Technology . 11 July, 2014. Copenhagen.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. British Standards Institute
    2006EN 15038: 2006 Translation Services – Service Requirements. London: BSI.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 2015ISO 17100: 2015 Translation Services. Requirements for translation services. London: BSI.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Brown, Peter F. , S.F. Chen , Stephen A. Della Pietra , Vincent J. Della Pietra , A.S. Kehler , and Robert L. Mercer
    1994 “Automatic Speech Recognition in Machine-aided Translation”. Computer Speech & Language8 (3): 177–187. doi: 10.1006/csla.1994.1008
    https://doi.org/10.1006/csla.1994.1008 [Google Scholar]
  8. Ciobanu, Dragoș
    2013Demonstration of Multilingual TTS, memoQ and DNS Integration. AccessedApril 20, 2016. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHRuQMrvhRY
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 2014 “Of Dragons and Speech Recognition Wizards and Apprentices.” Tradumàtica: Tecnologies de la Traducció12: 524–538.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. CIoL and ITI
    20112011 Rates and Salaries Survey for Translators and Interpreters. London: Chartered Institute of Linguists and Institute of Translation and Interpreting.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Dragsted, Barbara , and Inge G. Hansen
    2009 “Exploring Translation and Interpreting Hybrids: The Case of Sight Translation.” Meta54 (3): 588–604. doi: 10.7202/038317ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/038317ar [Google Scholar]
  12. Dragsted, Barbara , Inger M. Mees , and Inge G. Hansen
    2011 “Speaking Your Translation: Students’ First Encounter with Speech Recognition Technology.” The International Journal for Translation & Interpreting Research3 (1): 10–43.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Drugan, Joanna
    2013Quality In Professional Translation: Assessment and Improvement. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Duarte, Tiago , Rafael Prikladnicki , Fabio Calefato , and Filippo Lanubile
    2014 “Speech Recognition for Voice-Based Machine Translation.” IEEE Software31 (1): 26–31. doi: 10.1109/MS.2014.14
    https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2014.14 [Google Scholar]
  15. Dunne, Keiran J. , and Elena S. Dunne
    (eds) 2011Translation and Localization Project Management. The Art of the Possible. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ata.xvi
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.xvi [Google Scholar]
  16. Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen , and Gary Massey
    2014 “Cognitive Ergonomic Issues in Professional Translation.” InThe Development of Translation Competence: Theories and Methodologies from Psycholinguistics and Cognitive Science, edited by John W. Schwieter , and Aline Ferreira , 58–86. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Fernández Costales, Alberto
    2014 “Video Game Localisation: Adapting Superheroes to Different Cultures.” Quaderns: Revista de Traducció21: 225–239.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. García, Ignacio
    2011 “Translating by Post-editing: Is It the Way Forward?” Machine Translation25 (3): 217–237. doi: 10.1007/s10590‑011‑9115‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10590-011-9115-8 [Google Scholar]
  19. 2012 “Machines, Translations and Memories: Language Transfer in the Web Browser.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology20 (4): 451–461. doi: 10.1080/0907676X.2012.726230
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2012.726230 [Google Scholar]
  20. Jiménez Crespo, Miguel A
    2013Translation and Web Localization. London/New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Ludovik, Yevgeny , and Ron Zacharski
    2000 “Improving the Accuracy of Speech Recognition Systems for Professional Translators.” InNatural Language Processing — NLP 2000, edited by Dimitris N. Christodoulakis , 293–303. Berlin: Springer. doi: 10.1007/3‑540‑45154‑4_28
    https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45154-4_28 [Google Scholar]
  22. Matis, Nancy
    2010Comment gérer vos projets de traduction. Liège: Edi.pro.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Mesa Lao, Bartolomé
    2014 “Speech-Enabled Computer-Aided Translation: A Satisfaction Survey with Post-Editor Trainees.” In Proceedings of the EACL 2014 Workshop on Humans and Computer-Assisted Translation , 99–103. Gothenburg: Association for Computational Linguistics. doi: 10.3115/v1/W14‑0315
    https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/W14-0315 [Google Scholar]
  24. Moran, John , Christian Saam , and David Lewis
    2014 “Towards Desktop-Based CAT Tool Instrumentation”. InThird Workshop on Post-Editing Technology and Practice, 99–112. Vancouver: AMTA.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. O’Brien, Sharon
    2013 “The Borrowers: Researching the Cognitive Aspects of Translation.” Target25 (1): 5–17. doi: 10.1075/target.25.1.02obr
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.25.1.02obr [Google Scholar]
  26. O’Brien, Sharon 2014Teaching Post-Editing: A Proposal for Course Content - Revisited a Decade or So Later. Lecture delivered at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. AccessedDecember 4, 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhZbIfuvnmI
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Pierce, John R. , John B. Carroll , Eric P. Hamp , David G. Hays , Charles F. Hockett , Anthony G. Oettinger , and Alan Perlis
    1966Language and Machines. Computers in Translation and Linguistics(ALPAC report). Report 1416. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Pym, Anthony
    2014Exploring Translation Theories, 2nd ed. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Romero Fresco, Pablo
    2011Subtitling through Speech Recognition: Respeaking. Manchester: St. Jerome.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Saldanha, Gabriela , and Sharon O’Brien
    2013Research Methodologies in Translation Studies. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Schaeffer, Moritz , and Michael Carl
    2014 “Measuring the Cognitive Effort of Literal Translation Processes.” In Proceedings of the EACL 2014 Workshop on Humans and Computer-Assisted Translation , 29–37. Gothenburg: Association for Computational Linguistics. doi: 10.3115/v1/W14‑0306
    https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/W14-0306 [Google Scholar]
  32. Tufiș, Dan , Tiberiu Boro , and tefan D. Dumitrescu
    2013 “The RACAI Speech Translation System Challenges of Morphologically Rich Languages.” In Proceedings of the 7th Conference on Speech Technology and Human - Computer Dialogue (SpeD) , 1–10. IEEE Computer Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Venuti, Lawrence
    1995The Translator’s Invisibility. New York: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203360064
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203360064 [Google Scholar]
  34. Zampieri, Marcos , and Mihaela Vela
    2014 “Quantifying the Influence of MT Output in the Translators’ Performance: A Case Study in Technical Translation.” In Proceedings of the EACL 2014 Workshop on Humans and Computer-Assisted Translation , 93–98. Gothenburg: Association for Computational Linguistics. doi: 10.3115/v1/W14‑0314
    https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/W14-0314 [Google Scholar]
  35. Zapata Rojas, Julián
    2014a “Exploring Multimodality for Translator-Computer Interaction.” In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Multimodal Interaction , 339–343. New York: ACM.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. 2014b “Source-Text Preparation in Translation Dictation: Multimodal Considerations.” Presentation at the International Workshop on Translation, Bilingualism and Translation Technology . 11 July 2014. Copenhagen.
    [Google Scholar]
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