Cover not available
Article published In:
Translation, Cognition & Behavior
Vol. 2:1 (2019) ► pp.55–78

Written alternative translation solutions in the translation process

A case study

ORCID logo | University of Malta

Alternative translation solutions (ATSs) are a core and abundant element of the translation process. Despite being a recurrent topic in translation process research (TPR), the majority of previous studies deal with verbal ATSs while written ATSs remain an underresearched aspect. This article focuses on written ATSs and their role in the translatorial decision-making process. Drawing mainly on research into translatorial decision-making and TPR, it investigates 188 written ATSs present in the first draft of a Maltese literary translation from French produced by an experienced translator. Various categorisation systems were created to analyse the textual data. The results indicate that written ATSs are a complex phenomenon worth exploring further as they seem to be a shared behaviour by many translators.

Keywords: written alternative translation solutions, decision-making, draft translation, literary translation, translation process research
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Decisions in the translation process
    • 2.1The make-up of decisions
    • 2.2ATSs and the translation process
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1The participant and data
    • 3.2Data analysis methodology
      • 3.2.1Written ATSs come in different shapes and sizes
      • 3.2.2Linguistic categories
        • a.Lexical
        • b.Syntactic
        • c.Morphological
        • d.Orthographic
        • e.Informativity
        • f.Other
      • 3.2.3Beyond the linguistic categories
        • a.Minor doubt
        • b.Accuracy of ST comprehension and rendering
        • c.TL rendering and consideration
        • d.Strategy
        • e.Preferences/poetics/ideology
  • 4.Analysis and results
    • 4.1Written ATSs come in different shapes and sizes
    • 4.2Distribution of written ATSs in D1
    • 4.3Linguistic categories
    • 4.4Beyond linguistic categories
      • a.more literal/less literal
      • b.explicitation
      • c.foreignisation/domestication
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1The role of written ATSs
    • 5.2The structure of decisions: Accounting for written ATSs and postponed decisions
  • 6.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 7 March 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tcb.00019.bor
References
Angelone, Erik
2010 “Uncertainty, Uncertainty Management and Metacognitive Problem Solving in the Translation Task.” In Translation and Cognition. Edited by G. Shreve and E. Angelone, 17–40. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Angelone, Erik, and Gregory M. Shreve
2011 “Uncertainty Management, Metacognitive Bundling in Problem-solving and Translation Quality.” In Cognitive Explorations of Translation. Edited by S. O’Brien, 108–130. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Antunović, Goranka, and Nataša Pavlović
2011 “Moving on, Moving back or Changing It Here and Now: Self-revision in Student Translation Processes from L2 and L3.” Across Languages and Cultures 12 (2): 213–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bernofsky, Susan
2013 “Translation and the Art of Revision.” In Translation: Translators on Their Work and What It Means. Edited by E. Allen, and S. Bernofsky, 223–233. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Borg, Claudine
2016 A Literary Translation in the Making: An In-depth Investigation into the Process of a Literary Translation from French into Maltese. PhD Thesis, Aston University.Google Scholar
2017 “Decision-making and Alternative Translation Solutions in the Literary Translation Process: A Case Study.” Across Languages and Cultures 18 (2): 279–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Stuart
2000 “Choice Network Analysis in Translation Research.” In Intercultural Faultlines. Research models in Translation Studies I: Textual and cognitive aspects. Edited by M. Olohan, 29–42. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Corbin, Ruth M.
1980 “Decisions that Might Not Get Made.” In Cognitive Processes in Choice and Decision Behavior. Edited by T. S. Wallsten, 47–67. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
De Groot, Annette M. B.
1997 “The Cognitive Study of Translation and Interpretation: Three approaches.” In Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting. Edited by J. H. Danks, G. M. Shreve, S. B. Fountain, and M. K. McBeath, 25–56. London: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
Dragsted, Barbara
2012 “Indicators of Difficulty in Translation: Correlating Product and Process Data.” Across Languages and Cultures 13 (1): 81–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta
2005 Expertise and Explicitation in the Translation Process. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fraser, Janet
1996 “Mapping the Process of Translation.” Meta 41 (1): 84–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000 “What Do Real Translators Do? Developing the Use of TAPs from Professional Translators.” In Tapping and Mapping the Processes of Translation and Interpreting. Edited by S. Tirkkonen-Condit and R. Jääskeläinen, 111–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gambier, Yves
2010 “Translation Strategies and Tactics.” In Handbook of Translation Studies, Vol. 11. Edited by Y. Gambier and L. van Doorslaer, 412–418. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Göpferich, Susanne
2009 “Towards a Model of Translation Competence and its Acquisition: The Longitudinal Study TransComp .” In Behind the Mind: Methods, Models and Results in Translation Process Research. Edited by S. Göpferich, A. L. Jakobsen, and I. M. Mees, 11–37. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
Hatim, Basil, and Jeremy Munday
2004 Translation: An Advanced Resource Book. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hubscher-Davidson, Severine
2007 An Empirical Investigation into the Effects of Personality on the Performance of French to English Student Translators. PhD Thesis, University of Bath.Google Scholar
Hubscher-Davidson, S.
2018 “Do Translation Professionals Need to Tolerate Ambiguity to be Successful? A Study of the Links between Tolerance of Ambiguity, Emotional Intelligence and Job Satisfaction.” In Innovation and Expansion in Translation Process Research. Edited by R. Jääskeläinen and I. Lacruz, 77–103. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jääskeläinen, Riitta
2012 “Translation Psychology.” In Handbook of Translation Studies, Vol. 31. Edited by Y. Gambier and L. van Doorslaer, 191–197. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jennings, David, and Stuart Wattam
1998 Decision Making: An Integrated Approach. London: Financial Times/Pitman.Google Scholar
Krings, Hans P.
2001 Repairing Texts: Empirical Investigations of Machine Translation Post-editing Processes. Translated by G. S. Koby, G. M. Shreve, K. Mischerikow, and S. Litzer. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.Google Scholar
Lefevere, André
1992 Translating Literature: Practice and Theory in a Comparative Literature Context. New York: The Modern Language Association of America.Google Scholar
Mason, Ian
1994 “Discourse, Ideology and Translation.” In Language, Discourse and Translation in the West and Middle East. Edited by R. de Beaugrande, A. Shunnaq, and M. Helmy Heliel, 23–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matthews, Peter
2005 Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mossop, Brian
2010 Revising and Editing for Translators. 2nd ed. St Jerome: Manchester.Google Scholar
Munday, Jeremy
2012 Evaluation in Translation: Critical Points of Translator Decision-making. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Orasanu, Judith, and Terry Connolly
1995 “The Reinvention of Decision Making.” In Decision Making In Action: Models and Methods. Edited by G. Klein, J. Orasanu, R. Calderwood, and C. E. Zsambok, 3–20. New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
PACTE
2008 “First Results of a Translation Competence Experiment: ‘Knowledge of Translation’ and ‘Efficacy of the Translation Process.” In Translator and Interpreter Training: Issues, Methods and Debates. Edited by J. Kearns, 104–126. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
2011 “Results of the Validation of the PACTE Translation Competence Model: Translation Problems and Translation Competence.” In Methods and Strategies of Process Research: Integrative Approaches in Translation Studies. Edited by C. Alvstad, A. Hild, and E. Tiselius, 317–343. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prassl, Friederike
2010 “Translators’ Decision-making Processes in Research and Knowledge Integration.” In New Approaches in Translation Process Research. Edited by S. Göpferich, F. Alves, and I. M. Mees, 57–81. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
Pym, Anthony
1992 “Translation Error Analysis and the Interface with Language Teaching.” In Teaching Translation and Interpreting: Training, Talent and Experience. Edited by C. Dollerup, and A. Loddegaard, 279–288. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003 “Redefining Translation Competence in an Electronic Age. In Defence of a Minimalist Approach.” Meta 48 (4): 481–497. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Risku, Hanna
2014 “Translation Process Research as Interaction Research: From Mental to Socio-cognitive Processes.” In Minding Translation, ed. by R. Muñoz, special issue of MonTI 11: 331–353. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, Eric.-Emmanuel
2001 Monsieur Ibrahim et les Fleurs du Coran. Paris: Albin Michel.Google Scholar
2014 Is-Sur Ibrahim u l-Fjuri fil-Koran [Monsieur Ibrahim et les Fleurs du Coran]. Translated by T. Aquilina. Rabat: Faraxa Publishing.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Ros, and Nicholas de Lange
2006 “A Dialogue: on a Translator’s Interventions’. In The Translator as Writer. Edited by S. Bassnett and P. Bush, 9–19. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Shih, Claire Y.
2015 “Problem-solving and Decision-making in Translation Revision: Two Case Studies.” Across Languages and Cultures 16 (1): 69–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja
2000 “Uncertainty in Translation Processes.” In Tapping and Mapping the Processes of Translation and Interpreting. Edited by S. Tirkkonen-Condit and R. Jääskeläinen, 123–142. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Toury, Gideon
1995 Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Venuti, Lawrence
1995 The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilss, Wolfram
1994 “A Framework for Decision-making in Translation.” Target 6 (2): 131–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1996 Knowledge and Skills in Translator Behavior. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1998 “Decision Making in Translation.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. Edited by M. A. Baker, 57–60. London: Routledge.Google Scholar