Cover not available
Part of
Eye Tracking and Multidisciplinary Studies on Translation
Edited by Callum Walker and Federico M. Federici
[Benjamins Translation Library 143] 2018
► pp. 121–143

Chapter 7
Problem solving in the translation of linguistic metaphors from Chinese into Portuguese

An empirical-experimental study

ORCID logo

This empirical-experimental study investigates the cognitive effort in the problem solving process guiding decision making in the translation of linguistic metaphors in a journalistic text by twelve professional translators from Chinese into Portuguese. The tools for the collection of the data were retrospective verbal protocols, and the Translog II program (Carl 2012), which logs keystrokes, mouse, and eye movements connected to a Tobii T120 eye tracker. Questionnaires were also used. For the quantitative analysis, a linear mixed effects regression model (LMER) was applied to the data set to indirectly measure cognitive effort for linguistic metaphor translation. The dependent variable was total production time. The controversial predictors were type of expression (metaphorical or literal), and translation strategy. For the qualitative analysis, retrospective protocols were analyzed for subjects’ verbalization of problem solving decisions regarding the linguistic metaphor under study. For the analysis and discussion, quantitative and qualitative data were triangulated, whereby parameters are proposed in order to enable the measurement of the problem solving process for the translation of linguistic metaphors. The outcomes of this study demonstrate that (1) there is no expression type effect on total production time, and (2) the predictor translation strategy is relevant to production time, which was confirmed by the retrospective protocol. This study contributes to Chinese Portuguese Translation Process Research methodologies, as well as to a deeper understanding of the complexity of cognitive processes underlying the translation of metaphors from Chinese into Portuguese, which is anticipated to contribute significantly to the teaching of metaphor translation.

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Equipment and analysis tools
    • 3.2Participants
    • 3.3Task execution settings
    • 3.4Data quality
    • 3.5Experimental text
    • 3.6Methodology of analysis
  • 4.Data analysis and discussion of results
  • 5.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 16 October 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.143.07sch
References
Baayen, Harald R.
2008 Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction Using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baker, Mona
2000 In Others Words: A Course Book on Translation. London and New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Balling, Laura W.
2013 “Reading Authentic Texts: What Counts as Cognate?” Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 16 (3): 637–653.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Balling, Laura W., and Michael Carl
2014 “Production Time Across Languages and Tasks: A Large-scale Analysis using the CRITT Translation Process Database.” In The Development of Translation Competence: Theories and Methodologies from Psycholinguistics and Cognitive Science, ed. by John W. Schwieter, and Aline Ferreira, 239–268. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Bates, Douglas, Martin Maechler, Ben Bolker, and Steven Walker
2014 “lme4: Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using Eigen and S4.” R package version 3.1.2. [URL] (accessed 14 April, 2018).
Bereiter, Carl, and Marlene Scardamalia
1987 The Psychology of Written Composition. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Carl, Michael, and Barbara Dragsted
2012 “Inside the Monitor Model: Process of Default and Challenged Translation Production.” Translation: Corpora, Computation, Cognition 2 (1): 127–145.Google Scholar
Carl, Michael, Moritz Schaeffer, and Srinivas Bangalore
2016 “The CRITT and Translation Process Database.” In New Directions in Empirical Translation Process Research, ed. by Michael Carl, Srinivas Bangalore, and Moritz Schaeffer, 13–56. Heidelberg and New York, NY: Springer.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cheng, Xiasojing
2009 Chinese Metaphors in Political Discourse. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Muncie: Ball State University.Google Scholar
Croft, William, and Alan D. Cruse
2004 Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dagut, Menachem B.
1976 “Can Metaphor Be Translated?” Babel 12 (1): 21–33.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
da Silva, Igor Antonio Lourenco
2012 (Des)compactação de Significados e Esforço Cognitivo no Processo Tradutório: um estudo da metáfora gramatical na construção do texto traduzido. PhD Thesis, Belo Horizonte: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais 2012.Google Scholar
De Groot, Annette M. B.
1997 “The Cognitive Study of Translation and Interpretation: Three Approaches.” In Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpretation, ed. by Joseph H. Danks, Gregory M. Shreve, Stephen B. Fountain, and Michael K. McBeath, 25–56. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage 1997.Google Scholar
Dragsted, Barbara
2010 “Coordination of Reading and Writing Process in Translation.” In Translation and Cognition, ed. by Gregory M. Shreve, and Erik Angelone, 41–62. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W.
(ed) 2008 The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W., Josephine M. Bogdanovich, Jeffrey R. Sykes, and Dale J. Barr
1997 “Metaphor in Idiom Comprehension.” Journal of Memory and Language 37: 141–154.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gile, Daniel
2009 Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glucksberg, Sam
2003 “The Psycholinguistic of Metaphor.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7 (2): 72–96.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hayes, John R.
2006 “New Directions in Writing Theory.” In Handbook of Writing Research, ed. by Charles A. MacArthur, Steve Graham and Jill Fitzgerald, 28–40. New York, NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
Hvelplund, Kristian T.
2011 Allocation of Cognitive Resources in Translation: an Eye-Tracking and Key-logging Study. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School.Google Scholar
Hyönä, Jukka, Robert F. Lorch, and Mike Rink
2003 “Eye Movements Measures to Study Global Text Processing.” In The Mind’s Eye: Cognitive and Applied Aspects of Eye Movement Research, ed. by Ralph Radach, Jukka Hyönä, and Heiner Deubel, 313–334. Amsterdam: Elsevier.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide
2008 “Vision Metaphors for the Intellect: Are They Really Cross-linguistic?” Atlantis 30 (1): 15–33.Google Scholar
Inhoff, Albrecht Werner, Susan D. Lima, and Patrick J. Carroll
1984 “Contextual Effects on Metaphor Comprehension in Reading.” Memory and Cognition 12 (6): 558–567.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jääskeläinen, Riitta
1999 Tapping the Process: An Explorative Study of the Cognitive and Affective Factors Involved in Translating. Joensuu: Joensuu University.Google Scholar
Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke
2014 “The Development and Current State of Translation Process Research.” In The Known Unknowns of Translation Studies, ed. by Elke Brems, Reyne Meylaerts and Luv van Doorslaer, 65–88. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Jensen, Astrid
2005 “Coping with Metaphor: A Cognitive Approach to Translating Metaphor.” Hermes 35: 183–209.Google Scholar
Jiang, X.
2011 “Minsheng qiu wen pan zhenggai yingdui molihua tiaozhan.” Yazhou Zhoukan – The International Chinese Newsweekly March 20: 22–29.Google Scholar
Just, Marcel C., and Patricia A. Carpenter
1980 “A Theory of Reading: from Eye Fixations to Comprehension.” Psychological Review 87 (4): 329–354.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltán
2009 “Metaphor, Culture and Discourse: the Pressure of Coherence.” In Metaphor and Discourse, ed. by Andreas Musolff, and Jörg Zinken, 11–24. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005 Metaphor in Culture: Universality and Variation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson
1980 Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Li, Xingshan, Pingping Liu, and Keith Rayner
2011 “Eye Movement Guidance in Chinese Reading: Is There a Preferred Viewing Location?” Vision Research 51 (10): 1146–1156.Google Scholar
Lorenzo, María Pilar
1999 “La seguridad del traductor profesional en la traducción a una lengua extranjera.” In Probing the Process in Translation: methods and results, ed. by Gyde Hansen, 121–134. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
Mandelblit, Nili
1995 “The Cognitive View of Metaphor and its Implications.” In Translation and Meaning 18 (3): 483–495.Google Scholar
Martikainen, Kati
2007 “What Can Translation Reveal of Metaphors? Translation Experiment on the Psychological Reality of the Conceptual Metaphor Theory.” In Text, Processes, and Corpora: Research Inspired by Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit, ed. by Riitta Jääskeläinen, Tiina Puurtinen, and Hilkka Stotesbury, 145–159. Maastricht: Universitaire Pers Maastricht.Google Scholar
Mason, Kirsten
1982 “Metaphor and Translation.” Babel 28 (3): 140–149.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McDonald, Scott A., and Richard C. Shillcock
2003 “Eye Movements Reveal the On-line Computation of Lexical Probabilities During Reading.” Psychological Science 14 (6): 648–652.Google Scholar
Newmark, Peter A.
1981 Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Nida, Eugene A.
1964 Towards a Science of Translating. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Pragglejaz Group
2007 “MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used word in discourse.” Metaphor and Symbol 22 (1): 1–39.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rayner, Keith
1998 “Eye Movements in Reading and Information Processing: 20 Years of Research.” Psychological Bulletin 124 (3): 372–422.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmaltz, Márcia, Igor AL da Silva, Adriana Pagano, Fabio Alves, Ana Luísa V. Leal, Derek F. Wong, Lidia S. Chao, and Paulo Quaresma
2016 “Cohesive Relations in Text Comprehension and Production: An Exploratory Study Comparing Translation and Post-editing.” In New Directions in Empirical Translation Process Research, 239–263. Heidelberg and New York, NY: Springer.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sharma, Deependra, and Pankaj Madan
2014 “Influence of Drivers for Store Choice on Store Selection and Loyalty.” In Managing in Recovering Markets, ed. by S. Chatterjee, N. P. Singh, D. P. Goyal and N. Gupta, 343–350. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Sjørup, Annette C.
2013 Cognitive Effort in Metaphor Translation: An Eye-Tracking and Key-logging Study. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School.Google Scholar
Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja
2002 “Metaphoric Expressions in Translation Processes.” Across Language and Cultures 3 (1): 101–116.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van den Broeck, Raymond
1981 “The Limits of Translatability Exemplified by Metaphor Translation.” Poetics Today 2 (4): 73–87.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vinay, Jean-Paul, and Jean Darbelnet
1958/2000 “A Methodology for Translation.” In The Translation Studies Reader, ed. by Lawrence Venuti, 212–219. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar