Writing and Translation process research: Bridging the gap.

Contracting, expanding and integrating translation: who and where to draw the line?

“…In the recent two decades, a blueprint for a typology of text production gradually emerged: In Dam-Jensen & Heine's (2013) version, text production is taken as a superordinate category subsuming all acts of producing a coherent written text for a specific audience with a specific goal in mind, including writing, translation and adaptation, and this entails that writing and translation share the aforementioned characteristics in essence, despite differing in specific writing phases and strategies. Risku et al (2016, p.48) further explore Dam-Jensen & Heine's (2013) claim, yet yield a rather inconclusive result: "The positioning of translation and writing on different levels of the scholarly concept system has led to an -admittedly, theoretically inspiring -situation in which the borders of translation have become increasingly blurred, and the translation concept itself seems to elude definition". Risku et al, however, claim that translation bears a higher degree of interlinguality and imitation, but attribute creativity to both writing and translation.…”

“…This is because writing and translation are not standalone concepts which can be singled out from trillions of episodes of writing and translating, so there is no, pace Screnock (2018, p.498-499), any such question of "[w]hether translation is a part of rewriting or rewriting is a part of translation" or any such answer which consists of a general truth about translationality or writing as a mode of its own. Comparatively speaking, the method of process comparison employed in research like Dam-Jensen & Heine (2013) and Risku et al (2016) perhaps pertains more within our integrative boundaries -we can certainly entertain the envisioning of previous writing experience and previous translating experience and compare them in our acts of recontextualization, without having to abstract any general comparison between the ultimate notions of writing and translating or delineate a clear start and end of a general writing/translation process. In the end, it is important to remember that whenever the term 'translation' or 'writing' is conjured up by an individual, it is always a sign that integrates (and gets integrated into) a series of activities, within the individual's perspective, activities which otherwise remain unintegrated.…”

Developing Strategies for Success in a Cross-Disciplinary Global Virtual Team Project: Collaboration Among Student Writers and Translators

“…Some studies of cross-disciplinary collaboration among documentation writers and translators demonstrate the fact that writers and translators need many of the same competencies and abilities in order to succeed. These competencies include cultural awareness and sensitivity (Mateeva, 2008; Wang, 2013; Yu, 2012), an understanding of contexts (cultural, professional, collaborative) (Melton, 2008), interpersonal communication skills, and the ability to bring both logical and creative approaches to the activity of text production (Dam-Jensen & Heine, 2013).…”

The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Education

“…(2) the increasing use of data-driven technologies (of which corpus and MT tools are two examples) in computermediated learning environments; and (3) the status of English as a global lingua franca. We start from the premise that L2 learning and translation are two cognitive processes that overlap to some extent, in particular when focusing on written text production (Meyer and Russell 1988;Uzawa 1996;Cohen and Carson 2001;Yan and Wang 2012;Dam-Jensen and Heine 2013;Göpferich and Nelezen 2014) and that L2 learning presupposes some degree of "mental translation" (Pym et al 2013, p. 6). Based on this premise, the chapter first traces a set of common challenges for both L2 learners and translators, among which collocations, both lexical and grammatical, are identified as the most difficult ones to resolve.…”