Translation practice in the workplace: contextual analysis and implications for machine translation

Karamanis, Nikiforos; Luz, Saturnino; Doherty, Gavin

doi:10.1007/s10590-011-9093-x

Cited by 27 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 15 publications

(15 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Karamanis et al (2011) point to the need for user-centered design to support the flexibility (and, I would add, increasing complexity) of the translation process since any technology that is too rigid actually disrupts the work it is supposed to support (ibid: 49). Translator-computer interaction would likely benefit from an increased focus on ethnographic-style, cognitive ergonomic studies of both translation tools and the translation process itself.…”

Section: Interaction and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translation as human–computer interaction

O’Brien¹

2012

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper seeks to characterise translation as a form of human-computer interaction. The evolution of translator-computer interaction is explored and the challenges and benefits are enunciated. The concept of cognitive ergonomics is drawn on to argue for a more caring and inclusive approach towards the translator by developers of translation technology. A case is also made for wider acceptance by the translation community of the benefits of the technology at their disposal and for more humanistic research on the impact of technology on the translator, the translation profession and the translation process. KeywordsHuman-computer interaction; translation memory; machine translation; translation technology; cognitive ergonomics IntroductionThe field of professional translation is, without a doubt, a form of human-computer interaction (HCI). In a period of less than thirty years, technology has radically transformed the way in which professional translators work (Folaron 2011: 429). Among other technologies, translation memory (TM) tools are now standard in many professional translation domains and recent successes in Machine Translation (MT) have led to a significant increase in usage and commercial implementation, which is in turn touching on the lives of professional translators. 2The objective of this paper is to characterise translation as a form of HCI and to explore the benefits and challenges that the interaction between translation, translator, and the computer present. I wish to expand on the discussion on how computers have changed the translation landscape over time and how, perhaps more importantly, the current landscape is changing radically and speedily and how we, translation researchers, trainers and practising translators, are reacting to this change. I will raise some important questions throughout, and will offer some potential answers, but I do not pretend to have all the answers.A discussion about translation as a form of human-computer interaction requires a statement about the concept of 'translation' being reflected upon. Tymockzo (2007) argues that the narrow English-language Western European concept of 'translation' as a form of transfer between a written source language text and a target language one must be broadened into a concept of '*translation' as cross-cultural understanding that is not reliant on dominant Western European views nor on restricted notions of what constitutes a text.1 I agree in principle with Tymoczko's appeal for broadening the concept within translation studies, while, at the same time, I defend the legitimacy of the concept of translation I mainly refer to here, i.e. bilingual, text-based translation in a specialised domain destined for public consumption for which the translator is paid (though exceptions to this latter qualifier are now emerging). While this may be a restricted concept of translation, it constitutes a significant global economic activity and is, in my experience, the type of translation from which many translation studies graduates e...

show abstract

Section: Interaction and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translation as human–computer interaction

O’Brien¹

2012

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This feeling of being trapped might, at least partly, have been caused by the translators' lack of knowledge of the origin of the MT matches, suggesting that MT seems to be a "black box" for translators. This "black box perception" was also found by Karamanis et al (2010), who stated that "[A]lthough the specialised researchers who developed an MT engine are probably able to tell why a certain string has been translated in a particular way, for most people who are not working in this domain the MT engine remains a black box" (Karamanis et al 2010: 251, see also Karamanis et. al 2011: 45-46).…”

Section: Discussion and Concluding Remarksmentioning

confidence: 58%

Translator Attitudes towards Translator-Computer Interaction - Findings from a Workplace Study

Bundgaard

2017

HJLCB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Today technology is part and parcel of professional translation, and translation has therefore been characterised as Translator-Computer Interaction (TCI) (O'Brien 2012). Translation is increasingly carried out using Translation Memory (TM) systems which incorporate machine translation (MT), referred to as MT-assisted TM translation, and in this type of tool, translators switch between editing TM matches and post-editing MT matches. It is generally assumed that translators' attitudes towards technology impact on this interaction with the technology. Drawing on Eagly/ Chaiken's (1995) definition of attitudes as evaluations of entities with favour or disfavour and on qualitative data from a workplace study of TCI, conducted as part of a PhD dissertation (Bundgaard 2017) and partly reported on in Bundgaard et al. (2016), this paper explores translator attitudes towards TCI in the form of MT-assisted TM translation. In doing so, the paper has a particular focus on the disfavour towards TCI expressed by translators. Moreover, inspired by Olohan (2011), who applies Pickering's "mangle of practice" theory and analyses resistance and accommodation in TCI, the paper focuses on how translators accommodate resistances offered by the tool. The study shows that the translators express disfavour towards MT in many respects, but also acknowledge positive aspects of the technology and expect MT to play a significant role in their future working lives. The translators do not make many positive or negative comments about TM which might indicate that TM is a completely integrated part of their processes. The translators seem to have a flexible and pragmatic attitude towards TCI, adapting to the tool's imperfections and accommodating its resistances.

show abstract

“…In particular there have been few studies which focus on the translation activities most prevalent today, not in international or governmental institutions, or in literary translation, but in the commercial sector, where translators work freelance for translation agencies on texts from predominantly technical and commercial domains. Recent interesting contributions in that sector include Karamanis, Luz et al (2011) andLeBlanc (2013). At the time of writing in 2013, work has also begun in a research project at the University of Manchester, using an explicitly ethnographic approach and drawing on the longer tradition of workplace studies (see Luff, Hindmarsh et al 2000) and more recent studies of CSCW-computer-supported collaborative work-to study the interplay between human agency and material performativity in translation project management (see Olohan and Davitti 2015).…”

Section: Towards a Mangle-inspired Research Agenda For Translation Stmentioning

confidence: 99%

Science, Translation and the Mangle: A Performative Conceptualization of Scientific Translation

Olohan

2017

meta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Against a backdrop of growing interest in historical and sociological approaches to the translation of science, this paper explores the conceptual potential of Andrew Pickering’s ‘mangle of practice’ (Pickering 1992; 1993; 1995; Pickering and Guzik 2008) as a sociological framework for research into the translation of science. Pickering’s approach is situated within a performative idiom of science and seeks to account for the interplay of material and human agency in scientific practice. It sees scientific and technological advances as emerging temporally from a dialectic of resistance and accommodation, metaphorically the mangle of practice. This paper introduces the main tenets of Pickering’s argument, contextualizing it within the field of science and technology studies. It then explores some of the implications of construing translation in these terms. Firstly, this conceptual approach helps to recognize the role of translation in the performance of science and to seek ways of studying translation practices as an integral component of scientific practices. Secondly, Pickering’s posthumanist or decentred perspective focuses on both material and human agency and the interplay between them; a similar approach to the study of translation would foreground the interaction between translator agency and material performativity in studies of translation practices. I conclude with proposals for adopting this ontological shift in translation studies, where it may have the potential to enhance our understanding of translation practices, in particular in relation to tools, technologies and sociotechnical developments in translation.

show abstract

Translation practice in the workplace: contextual analysis and implications for machine translation

Cited by 27 publications

References 15 publications

Translation as human–computer interaction

Translation as human–computer interaction

Translator Attitudes towards Translator-Computer Interaction - Findings from a Workplace Study

Science, Translation and the Mangle: A Performative Conceptualization of Scientific Translation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About