This paper is an empirical study on pause patterns in fluent translation and monolingual text production. By comparing pauses recorded from both processes, two temporal features were discovered: Firstly, the mean length of pause at textual category boundaries grew the higher the category was in the linguistic hierarchy. Secondly, the length of pause at clause level and lower was on average longer in translation than in monolingual text production, whereas pauses above clause level tended to be shorter in translation. Besides the differences in pause duration, translation also affected the use of total production time. Translation requires on average a longer revision and monitoring phase while the drafting phase is completed more quickly. Both writing tasks used approximately the same proportion of time for the orientation phase.
Andriessen, Jerry, Koenraad de Smedt and Michael Zock
1996 “Discourse planning: Empirical research and computer models”. Ton Dijkstra and Koenraad de Smedt, eds. Computational psycholinguistics: AI and connectionist models of human language processing. London: Taylor & Francis Ltd. 1996 247–278.
Danks, Joseph H. and Jennifer Griffin
1997 “Reading and translation: A psycholinguistic perspective”. Joseph H. Danks, Gregory M. Shreve, Stephen B. Fountain and Michael K. McBeath, eds. Cognitive processes in translation and interpreting. London: Sage Publications Ltd 1997 161–175.
2004Segmentation in translation and translation memory systems: An empirical investigation of cognitive segmentation and effects of integrating a TM system into the translation process. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur. [PhD thesis.]
Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta
2006 “Segmentation of the writing process in translation: Experts versus novices”. K.P.H. Sullivan and E. Lindgren, eds. Computer keystroke logging and writing: Methods and applications. Amsterdam: Elsevier 2006 189–201.
2002 “Translation drafting by professional translators and by translation students”. Gyde Hansen, ed. Empirical translation studies: Process and product. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur 2002 191–204.
Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke and Lasse Schou
1999 “Translog documentation, version 1.0”. .Gyde Hansen, ed. Probing the process in translation: Methods and results. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur 1999 1–36. [Appendix 1.]
2000The effects of time on cognitive processes and strategies in translation. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School. [PhD thesis.]
2001 “Workshop summary of the EXPERTISE research group on translation processes in Savonlinna”. [URL]
2000Grammar and experimental evidence in Finnish compounds. Joensuu: University of Joensuu. [PhD thesis.]
1996It’s about time: Temporal aspects of cognitive processes in text production. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
de Smedt, Koenraad
1996 “Computational models of incremental grammatical encoding.” Ton Dijkstra and Koenraad de Smedt, eds. Computational psycholinguistics: AI and connectionist models of human language processing. London: Taylor & Francis Ltd 1996 279–307.
Whyatt, Bogusława, Katarzyna Stachowiak & Marta Kajzer-Wietrzny
2016. Similar and different: cognitive rhythm and effort in translation and paraphrasing. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 52:2
Zheng, Jianwei & Wenjun Fan
2021. Different processes for translating expressive versus informative texts? A computer-assisted study of professionals’ English–Chinese translation. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 36:3 ► pp. 782 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 november 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.