1887
Volume 6, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2211-3711
  • E-ISSN: 2211-372X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

According to the International Ergonomics Association, a focus on organizational ergonomics recognizes that people work within socio-technical systems that encompass tools, equipment, and computer interfaces as well as other actors in their professional environment and networks. In recent research, we have started investigating such socio-technical factors from an ergonomic perspective. Observations at professional workplaces, responses to questionnaires, and in-depth interviews with translators suggest that their perceived self-determination is more important to the success of socio-technical change than the technological developments themselves. A lack of involvement in decision-making at the workflow level may explain why so many translators have been resistant to taking new technology on board. We discuss how a feedback culture could mitigate many socio-technical issues by giving translators a voice in change and empowering them to contribute to organizational learning and growth.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ts.6.1.06ehr
2017-10-13
2019-11-12
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bundgaard, Kristine , Tina Paulsen Christensen , and Anne Schjoldager
    2016 “Translator-Computer Interaction in Action – An Observational Process Study of Computer-Aided Translation.” The Journal of Specialised Translation25: 106–130. AccessedJanuary 3, 2017. www.jostrans.org/issue25/art_bundgaard.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Canfora, Carmen , and Angelika Ottmann
    2015 “Risikomanagement für Übersetzungen [Risk Management for Translations].” trans-kom8 (2): 314–346. AccessedJanuary 3, 2017. www.trans-kom.eu/bd08nr02/trans-kom_08_02_02_Canfora_Ottmann_Risiko.20151211.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Chesterman, Andrew
    2013 “Models of What Processes?” Translation and Interpreting Studies8 (2): 155–168. doi: 10.1075/tis.8.2.02che.
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.8.2.02che [Google Scholar]
  4. Clark, Andy , and David J. Chalmers
    1998/2010 “The Extended Mind.” InThe Extended Mind, edited by R. Menary , 27–41. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. doi: 9780262014038.001.0001.
    https://doi.org/9780262014038.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  5. Dam, Helle V. , and Karen Korning Zethsen
    2016 “‘I Think It is a Wonderful Job.’ On the Solidity of the Translation Profession.” The Journal of Specialised Translation25: 174–186. AccessedJanuary 3, 2017. www.jostrans.org/issue25/art_dam.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Dresing, Thorsten , and Thorsten Pehl
    2011Praxisbuch Transkription. Regelsysteme, Software und praktische Anleitungen für qualitative ForscherInnen [Practical Manual for Transcription. Rules, Software, and Practical Instructions for Qualitative Researchers]. Marburg. AccessedMay 8, 2013. www.audiotranskription.de/praxisbuch.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen
    2014 “Challenges of Translation Process Research at the Workplace.” InMinding Translation, guestedited by R. Muñoz , 355–383. Special Issue 1 ofMonTI. doi: 10.6035/MonTI.2014.ne1.12.
    https://doi.org/10.6035/MonTI.2014.ne1.12 [Google Scholar]
  8. Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen , Andrea Hunziker Heeb , Gary Massey , Ursula Meidert , Silke Neumann , and Heidrun Becker
    2016 “An International Survey of the Ergonomics of Professional Translation.” ILCEA Revue27. AccessedJanuary 3, 2017. ilcea.revues.org/4004.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen , and Gary Massey
    2013 “Indicators of Translation Competence: Translators’ Self-Concepts and the Translation of Titles.” Journal of Writing Research5 (1): 103–131. doi: 10.17239/jowr‑2013.05.01.5.
    https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2013.05.01.5 [Google Scholar]
  10. 2014a “Cognitive Ergonomic Issues in Professional Translation.” InThe Development of Translation Competence: Theories and Methodologies from Psycholinguistics and Cognitive Science, edited by J. W. Schwieter , and A. Ferreira , 58–86. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 2014b “Translators and Machines: Working Together.” InMan vs. Machine? Vol. I, edited by W. Bauer , B. Eichner , N. Keßler , F. Mayer , and J. Ørsted , 199–207. Berlin: BDÜ Fachverlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Elia
    Elia 2016Expectations and Concerns of the European Language Industry. EUATC European Union of Associations of Translation Companies. AccessedJanuary 3, 2017. https://www.euatc.org/industry-surveys/item/download/5_acfddb871c7db7e30d399843c4c930f6.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Hollnagel, Erik , and David D. Woods
    2005Joint Cognitive Systems. Foundations of Cognitive Systems Engineering. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis. doi: 10.1201/9781420038194
    https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420038194 [Google Scholar]
  14. Hutchins, Edwin
    1995 “The Organization of Team Performances.” InCognition in the Wild, edited by E. Hutchins , 175–228. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. ISO 17100
    ISO 17100 2015Translation Services – Requirements for Translation Services. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Karamanis, Nikiforos , Saturnino Luz , and Gavin Doherty
    2011 “Translation Practice in the Workplace. Contextual Analysis and Implications for Machine Translation.” Machine Translation25 (1), 35–52. doi: 10.1007/s10590‑011‑9093‑x.
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10590-011-9093-x [Google Scholar]
  17. Kinnunen, Tuija , and Kaisa Koskinen
    eds. 2010Translators’ Agency. Tampere: Tampere University Press. AccessedJanuary 3, 2017. https://tampub.uta.fi/handle/10024/65639.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Krüger, Ralph
    2016 “Contextualising Computer-Assisted Translation Tools and Modelling Their Usability.” trans-kom9 (1): 114–148. AccessedJanuary 3, 2017. www.trans-kom.eu/bd09nr01/trans-kom_09_01_08_Krueger_CAT.20160705.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Lukumbu, Béatrice
    2016Ergonomic Translation. Eine Untersuchung zur Ergonomie am Übersetzerarbeitsplatz am Beispiel eines Schweizer Übersetzungsbüros [Ergonomic Translation. An Investigation of the Ergonomics of a Translator’s Workplace Using the Example of a Swiss Translation Agency]. Master’s thesis, Zurich University of Applied Sciences.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Menary, Richard
    2013 “The Extended Mind.” InEncyclopedia of the Mind, edited by H. Pashler , 336–339. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. doi: 10.4135/9781452257044.n124
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452257044.n124 [Google Scholar]
  21. Muñoz Martín, Ricardo
    2010 “On Paradigms and Cognitive Translatology.” InTranslation and Cognition, edited by G. M. Shreve , and E. Angelone , 169–187. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ata.xv.10mun
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.xv.10mun [Google Scholar]
  22. 2014 “Situating Translation Expertise: A Review with a Sketch of a Construct.” InThe Development of Translation Competence: Theories and Methodologies from Psycholinguistics and Cognitive Science, edited by J. Schwieter , and A. Ferriera , 3–21. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. 2016 “Processes of What Models? On the Cognitive Indivisibility of Translation Acts and Events.” Translation Spaces5 (1): 145–161. doi: 10.1075/ts.5.1.08mun.
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.5.1.08mun [Google Scholar]
  24. Nardie, Bonnie A.
    1996 “Studying Context: A Comparison of Activity Theory, Situated Action Models, and Distributed Cognition.” InContext and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction, edited by B. A. Nardie , 35–52. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. O’Brien, Sharon
    2012 “Translation as Human-Computer Interaction.” Translation Spaces1: 101–122. doi: 10.1075/ts.1.05obr.
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.1.05obr [Google Scholar]
  26. O’Brien, Sharon , Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow , Marcel Hasler , and Megan Connolly
    . Forthcoming. “Irritating CAT Tool Features that Matter to Translators.” Hermes57.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Olohan, Maeve
    2011 “Translators and Translation Technology: The Dance of Agency.” Translation Studies4 (3): 342–357. doi: 10.1080/14781700.2011.589656.
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14781700.2011.589656 [Google Scholar]
  28. Pym, Anthony
    2011 “What Technology Does to Translating.” Translation & Interpreting3 (1): 1–9. AccessedJanuary 3, 2017. www.trans-int.org/index.php/transint/article/view/121/81.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. 2013 “Translation Skill-Sets in a Machine-Translation Age.” Meta58 (3): 487–503. doi: 10.7202/1025047ar.
    https://doi.org/10.7202/1025047ar [Google Scholar]
  30. 2015 “Translating as Risk Management.” Journal of Pragmatics85: 67–80. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.06.010.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.06.010 [Google Scholar]
  31. Riegler, Alexander
    2002 “When is a Cognitive System Embodied?” Cognitive Systems Research3 (3): 339–348. doi: 10.1016/S1389‑0417(02)00046‑3.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1389-0417(02)00046-3 [Google Scholar]
  32. Risku, Hanna
    2002 “Situatedness in Translation Studies.” Cognitive Systems Research3 (3): 523–533. doi: 10.1016/S1389‑0417(02)00055‑4.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1389-0417(02)00055-4 [Google Scholar]
  33. 2010 “A Cognitive Scientific View on Technical Communication and Translation. Do Embodiment and Situatedness Really Make a Difference?” Target22 (1): 94–111. doi: 10.1075/target.22.1.06ris.
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.22.1.06ris [Google Scholar]
  34. Robbins, Philip , and Murat Aydede
    2009The Cambridge Handbook of Situated Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Rothlin, Philippe , and Peter R. Werder
    2008Boreout! Overcoming Workplace Demotivation. London: Kogan Page.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Selting, Margret , Peter Auer , Dagmar Barth-Weingarten , et al.
    2009 “Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem 2 (GAT 2).” [Discourse Analytical Transcription System 2 (GAT2)] Gesprächsforschung – Online-Zeitschrift zu verbalen Interaktion10: 353–402. AccessedJanuary 3, 2017. www.gespraechsforschung-ozs.de/heft2009/px-gat2.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Shreve, Gregory M.
    2006 “The Deliberate Practice: Translation and Expertise.” Journal of Translation Studies9 (1): 27–42.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Text Encoding Initiative
    Text Encoding Initiative 2008TEI P5: Guidelines for Electronic Text Encoding and Interchange. AccessedJanuary 3, 2017. www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Toudic, Daniel , and Guillaume de Brébisson
    2011 “Poste du travail du traducteur et responsabilité: une question de perspective.” [The Translator’s Job and Responsibility: A Question of Perspective] ILCEA Revue14. AccessedJanuary 3, 2017. ilcea.revues.org/index1043.html.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ts.6.1.06ehr
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ts.6.1.06ehr
Loading

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