‘Something old, something new, something borrowed’

References

1. ASTM
   ASTM 2023 F2575 “Standard Practice for Language Translation.”
2. Banerjee, Satanjeev, and Alon Lavie
   2005 “METEOR: An Automatic Metric for MT Evaluation with Improved Correlation with Human Judgments.” InProceedings of the ACL Workshop on Intrinsic and Extrinsic Evaluation Measures for Machine Translation and/or Summarization, 65–72.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Bastin, Georges L.
   2009 “Adaptation.” InRoutledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, 2nd ed., ed. byMona Baker, and Gabriela Saldanha, 3–6. Abingdon: Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Bittner, Hansjörg
   2020 Evaluating the Evaluator: A Novel Perspective on Translation Quality Assessment. New York: Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Castilho, Sheila, Stephen Doherty, Federico Gaspari, and Joss Moorkens
   2018 “Approaches to Human and Machine Translation Quality Assessment.” InTranslation Quality Assessment: From Principles to Practice, ed. byJoss Moorkens, Sheila Castilho, Federico Gaspari, and Stephen Doherty, 9–38. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑91241‑7_2
   https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91241-7_2 [Google Scholar]
6. Chesterman, Andrew
   1997 Memes of Translation: The Spread of Ideas in Translation Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.22
   https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.22 [Google Scholar]
7. Chesterman, Andrew, and Emma Wagner
   2002 Can Theory Help Translators? A Dialogue Between the Ivory Tower and the Wordface. Abingdon: Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Dam, Helle V., Matilde Nisbeth Brøgger, and Karen Korning Zethsen
   eds. 2019 Moving Boundaries in Translation Studies. Abingdon: Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Devlin, Jacob, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova
   2019 “BERT: Pre-Training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding.” InProceedings of NAACL-HLT 2019, 4171–4186.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Doherty, Stephen
    2017 “Issues in Human and Automatic Translation Quality Assessment.” InHuman Issues in Translation Technology, ed. byDorothy Kenny, 131–148. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
11. European Union
    European Union 2024 “Translation Quality Evaluation: Info Pack for External Contractors.” https://commission.europa.eu/system/files/2024-02/DGT_Translation_quality_evaluation_Info%20pack_for_FL_contractors_27.02.2024.pdf
12. Ferraresi, Adriano, Gaia Aragrande, Alberto Barrón-Cedeño, Silvia Bernardini, and Maja Miličević Petrović
    2021 “Competences, Skills and Tasks in Today’s Jobs for Linguists: Evidence from a Corpus of Job Advertisements.” UPSKILLS IO1 Task 3 — Corpus analysis of job ads.pdf
13. Gambier, Yves
    2006 “Transformations in International News.” InTranslation in Global News. Proceedings of the Conference Held at the University of Warwick 23 June 2006, ed. byKyle Conway, and Susan Bassnett, 9–21. Coventry: University of Warwick.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Gouadec, Daniel
    1981 “Paramètres de l’évaluation des traductions.” Meta26 (2): 99–116. 10.7202/002949ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/002949ar [Google Scholar]
15. Gouadec, Daniel
    2010 “Quality in Translation.” InHandbook of Translation Studies (Volume 1), ed. byYves Gambier, and Luc van Doorslaer, 270–275. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hts.1.qua1
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hts.1.qua1 [Google Scholar]
16. Halverson, Sandra L.
    1999 “Conceptual Work and the ‘Translation’ Concept.” Target11 (1): 1–31.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Hansen, Gyde
    2010 “Translation ‘Errors.’” InHandbook of Translation Studies (Volume 1), ed. byYves Gambier, and Luc van Doorslaer, 385–388. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hts.1.tra3
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hts.1.tra3 [Google Scholar]
18. House, Juliane
    1997 Translation Quality Assessment: A Model Revisited. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Hutchins, John
    2001 “Machine Translation and Human Translation: In Competition or in Complementation?”, special issue ofInternational Journal of Translation131: 5–20.
    [Google Scholar]
20. ISO
    ISO 2015 17100 “Translation Services — Requirements for Translation Services.”
21. ISO
    ISO 2024a 11669 “Translation Projects — General Guidance.”
22. ISO
    ISO 2024b 5060 “Translation Services — Evaluation of Translation Output — General Guidance.”
23. Jeyanathan, Mangalakumari, Sam Afkhami, Fiona Smaill, Matthew S. Miller, Brian D. Lichty, and Zhou Xing
    2020 “Immunological Considerations for COVID-19 Vaccine Strategies.” Nature Reviews Immunology201: 615–632. 10.1038/s41577‑020‑00434‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41577-020-00434-6 [Google Scholar]
24. Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A.
    2018 “Crowdsourcing and Translation Quality: Novel Approaches in the Language Industry and Translation Studies.” InTranslation Quality Assessment: From Principles to Practice, ed. byJoss Moorkens, Sheila Castilho, Federico Gaspari, and Stephen Doherty, 69–93. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑91241‑7_4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91241-7_4 [Google Scholar]
25. Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A.
    2022 “Specialized Practices in Translation Settings.” InIntroduction to Translation and Interpreting Studies, ed. byJohn Schwieter, and Alina Ferreira, 104–130. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Katan, David
    2014 “Uncertainty in the Translation Professions: Time to Transcreate?” CULTUS71: 10–19.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Kenny, Dorothy
    2009 “Equivalence.” InRoutledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, 2nd ed., ed. byMona Baker, and Gabriela Saldanha, 77–80. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Koby, Geoffrey S., Paul Fields, Daryl Hague, Arle Lommel, and Alan Melby
    2014 “Defining Translation Quality.” Tradumàtica121: 413–420. 10.5565/rev/tradumatica.76
    https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/tradumatica.76 [Google Scholar]
29. Kocmi, Tom, Christian Federmann, Roman Grundkiewicz, Marcin Junczys-Dowmunt, Hitokazu Matsushita, and Arul Menezes
    2021 “To Ship or Not to Ship: An Extensive Evaluation of Automatic Metrics for Machine Translation.” InProceedings of the Sixth Conference on Machine Translation, 478–494, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Konttinen, Kalle, Leena Salmi, and Maarit Koponen
    2020 “Revision and Post-Editing Competences in Translator Education.” InTranslation Revision and Post-Editing: Industry Practices and Cognitive Processes, ed. byMaarit Koponen, Brian Mossop, Isabelle S. Robert, and Giovanna Scocchera, 187–202. Abingdon: Routledge. 10.4324/9781003096962‑15
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003096962-15 [Google Scholar]
31. Lommel, Arle
    2018 “Metrics for Translation Quality Assessment: A Case for Standardising Error Typologies.” InTranslation Quality Assessment: From Principles to Practice, ed. byJoss Moorkens, Sheila Castilho, Federico Gaspari, and Stephen Doherty, 109–128. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑91241‑7_6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91241-7_6 [Google Scholar]
32. Marchetti, Sofia
    2021 Translating the Pandemic for the Layperson: The Popularizing Approach in Medical Translation. MA diss.University of Padua.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Martindale, Marianna J., and Marine Carpuat
    2018 “Fluency Over Adequacy: A Pilot Study in Measuring User Trust in Imperfect MT.” InProceedings of AMTA 2018, Vol. 1: MT Research Track, 13–25.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Mossop, Brian
    2020 Revising and Editing for Translators. 4th ed.Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM)
    Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM) 2024 AccessedOctober 10, 2024. https://themqm.org/
36. Musacchio, Maria Teresa, and Virginia Zorzi
    2019 “Scientific Controversies and Popular Science in Translation. Rewriting, Transediting or Transcreation?” Lingue e Linguaggi291: 481–507.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Nitzke, Jean, Carmen Canfora, Silvia Hansen-Schirra, and Dimitrios Kapnas
    2024 “Decisions in Projects Using Machine Translation and Post-Editing.” The Journal of Specialised Translation41 (January): 127–148. 10.26034/cm.jostrans.2024.4715
    https://doi.org/10.26034/cm.jostrans.2024.4715 [Google Scholar]
38. Nord, Christiane
    2018 Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Explained. 2nd ed.Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Nyberg, Linnéa
    2023 Transcreation in Translation: A Study of the Use and Importance of Transcreation in the Swedish Translations of English Marketing Slogans. MA diss.University of Stockholm.
    [Google Scholar]
40. O’Hagan, Minako
    2013 “The Impact of New Technologies on Translation Studies: A Technological Turn?” InThe Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies, ed. byCarmen Millán, and Francesca Batrina, 503–518. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Palumbo, Giuseppe
    2009 Key Terms in Translation Studies. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Papineni, Kishore, Salim Roukos, Todd Ward, and Wei-Jing Zhu
    2002 “BLEU: A Method for Automatic Evaluation of Machine Translation.” InProceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, 311–18.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Pedersen, Daniel
    2014 “Exploring the Concept of Transcreation — Transcreation as ‘More Than’?” CULTUS71: 57–71.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Pietrzak, Paulina
    2014 “Towards Effective Feedback to Translation Students: Empowering Through Group Revision and Evaluation.”, special issue ofinTRAlinea. https://www.intralinea.org/specials/article/2095
    [Google Scholar]
45. Pym, Anthony
    1992 “Translation Error Analysis and the Interference with Language Teaching.” InThe Teaching of Translation, ed. byCay Dollerup, and Anne Loddegaard, 279–288. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/z.56.42pym
    [Google Scholar]
46. Quinci, Carla
    2023 “Using Technology to Investigate Thematic Competence in Specialised Translation: A Follow-Up.” InWhat’s Special about Specialised Translation? Essays in Honour of Federica Scarpa, ed. byGiuseppe Palumbo, Katia Peruzzo, and Gianluca Pontrandolfo, 217–245. Bern: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Quinci, Carla, and Maria Teresa Musacchio
    2023 “Analysing, Revising and Teaching LSP Phraseology: An Integrated Approach.” InAlle radici della fraseologia europea, ed. byGeneviève Henrot Sostero, 529–550. Bern: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Reiss, Katharina
    2000 Translation Criticism: Potentials and Limitations. Categories and Criteria for Translation Quality Assessment. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
49. Reiss, Katharina, and Hans J. Vermeer
    2014 Towards a General Theory of Translational Action: Skopos Theory Explained. Abingdon: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315759715
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315759715 [Google Scholar]
50. Robert, Isabelle S., Aline Remael, and Jim J. J. Ureel
    2017 “Towards a Model of Translation Revision Competence.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer11 (1): 1–19. 10.1080/1750399X.2016.1198183
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2016.1198183 [Google Scholar]
51. Rodríguez de Céspedes, Begoña
    2020 “Beyond the Margins of Academic Education: Identifying Translation Industry Training Practices through Action Research.” The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting Research12 (1): 115–126. 10.12807/ti.112201.2020.a07
    https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.112201.2020.a07 [Google Scholar]
52. Sánchez-Gijón, Pilar, and Dorothy Kenny
    2022 “Selecting and Preparing Texts for Machine Translation: Pre-Editing and Writing for a Global Audience.” InMachine Translation for Everyone: Empowering Users in the Age of Artificial Intelligence, ed. byDorothy Kenny, 81–103. Berlin: Language Science Press.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Scansani, Randy
    2020 Machine Translation for Institutional Academic Texts: Output, Quality, Terminology Translation and Post-Editor Trust. PhD diss.University of Bologna.
54. Scarpa, Federica
    2020 Research and Professional Practice in Specialised Translation. London: Palgrave. 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑51967‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-51967-2 [Google Scholar]
55. Schäffner, Christina
    2012 “Rethinking Transediting.” Meta57 (4): 866–883. 10.7202/1021222ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/1021222ar [Google Scholar]
56. Scocchera, Giovanna
    2020 “The Competent Reviser: A Short-Term Empirical Study on Revision Teaching and Revision Competence Acquisition.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer14 (1): 19–37. 10.1080/1750399X.2019.1639245
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2019.1639245 [Google Scholar]
57. Toury, Gideon
    2012 Descriptive Translation Studies — and Beyond. Revised ed.Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.100
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.100 [Google Scholar]
58. van Egdom, Gys-Walt
    2021 “Improving Revision Quality in Translator Training with TranslationQ.” InTranslation Revision and Post-Editing Industry Practices and Cognitive Processes, ed. byMaarit Koponen, Brian Mossop, Isabelle S. Robert, and Giovanna Scocchera, 203–225. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
59. van Egdom, Gys-Walt, Winibert Segers, Henri Bloemen, Hendrik J. Kockaert, and Bert Wylin
    2018 “Revising and Evaluating with TranslationQ.” Bayt Al-Hikma: Journal for Translation Studies21: 25–56.
    [Google Scholar]
60. Way, Andy
    2018 “Quality Expectations of Machine Translation.” InTranslation Quality Assessment: From Principles to Practice, ed. byJoss Moorkens, Sheila Castlho, Federico Gaspari, and Stephen Doherty, 159–178. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑91241‑7_8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91241-7_8 [Google Scholar]
61. Williams, Malcolm
    2009 “Translation Quality Assessment.” Mutatis Mutandis2 (1): 3–23.
    [Google Scholar]