Article published In:
Translation, Cognition & Behavior: Online-First Articles

Augmentation and translation crowdsourcing

Are collaborative translators’ minds truly “augmented”?

ORCID logo | Rutgers University

This paper critically discusses how crowdsourcing relate to the emergence of the so-called translation augmentation paradigm. As a broad generalization, these two technology-driven phenomena emerged as possible solutions to achieve better, more efficient or speedier solutions to complex problems than those that single individuals can solve on their own. They both can be contextualized within 4EA approaches to cognition, reframing problem-solving towards a distributed and extended perspective that goes beyond the limitations of the individual mind. Nevertheless, augmented translation refers to the coupling of human and machines in a technology-centric approach that attempts to increase the cognitive capabilities of translators, who remain in the loop and in charge (Lommel 2020; Angelone 2023). It relates to existing technological integrated systems beyond just the automation brought by TM and MT that learn and adapt from humans. The paper (1) interrelates distributed and extended cognitive approaches and crowdsourcing (Risku, Pein-Weber & Rogl 2016; Jiménez-Crespo 2017; Risku & Windhager 2020) in relation to AI and intelligence augmentation (IA), (2) analyzes the existing fuzziness in the theoretical and conceptual constructs to translation augmentation, (3) explores issues related to the locus of control and the center of the cognitive system in augmented crowdsourcing, as well as (4) looks ahead by introducing unexplored areas such as social augmentation. In doing so, the paper will attempt to answer whether human translators in crowdsourcing initiatives are, in fact, “in charge” and – or augmented.

Keywords: augmentation, crowdsourcing, cognitive translation, distributed and extended cognition, translation tools
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.First steps: Interrelating distributed and extended cognition, crowdsourcing and augmentation
  • 3.Defining augmentation
    • 3.1Is translation exclusively problem solving? Of augmentation, routine / complex tasks and crowdsourcing
    • 3.2The blurred borders between AI and Augmentation in translation crowdsourcing
  • 4.Between AI and AI: Augmentation and the locus of control
  • 5.Moving forward: From social augmentation and motivation to task prioritization
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 20 November 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tcb.00079.jim
References
Angelone, Erik
2023 “Weaving Adaptive Expertise into Translator Training.” In The Human Translator in the 2020s. Edited by Garry Massey, Elisa Huertas Barros & David Katan. 60–73. New York-London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Brabham, Daren
2013 Crowdsourcing. Cambridge: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brumback, Hubert K.
2018 “Can university students use basic breathing activities to regulate physiological responses caused by computer use? A pilot study”. In Augmented Cognition: Users and Contexts: 12th International Conference, AC 2018, Held as Part of HCI International 2018, Las Vegas, NV, USA, July 15–20, 2018, Proceedings, Part II, 15–31. Springer International Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carl, Michael
2020 “Translation, Artificial Intelligence, and Cognition.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Edited by Arnt Jakobsen and Fabio Alves. 500–517. New York/London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Camara, Lidia
2015 “Motivation for Collaboration in TED Open Translation”. International Journal of Web-Based Communication 11(2): 210–229.Google Scholar
Christensen, Tina Paulsen
2011 “Studies on the Mental Processes in Translation Memory Assisted Translation – the State of the Art.” Transkom 421: 137–160. [URL]
Daems, Joke
2022 “Dutch Literary Translators’ Use and Perceived Usefulness of Technology: The role of awareness and attitude”. In Using Technologies for Creative-Text Translation, edited by James H. Hadley et al.. 40–66. New York/London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DePalma, D.
(2021) “Augmenting Human Translator Performance”, [URL]
DePalma, Donald & Arle Lommel
2017 “Augmented Translation Powers up Language Services.” [URL]
Desjardins, Renee
2017 “Translation, Social Media, and the Concept of Augmentation: The good, the bad, and the interdisciplinary.” In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Social Media & Society (Toronto, ON, Canada) (SMSociety17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York. USA. Article 33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dingemanse, Mark et al.
2023 “Beyond Single-Mindedness: A figure-ground reversal for the Cognitive Sciences”. Cognitive Science 47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dragsted, Barbara
2006 “Computer-Aided Translation as a Distributed Cognitive Task”. Pragmatics & Cognition, 14(2): 443–464. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 “Computer-Aided Translation as a Distributed Cognitive Task”. In Cognition Distributed. Edited by Itiel E. Dror & Stevan Harnad. 237–256. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dubova, Marina, Galesic, Mirta & Robert L. Goldstone
2022 “Cognitive Science of Augmented Intelligence”. Cognitive Science 46(12):e13229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen
2017 “An Ergonomic Perspective of Translation”. In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Edited by John W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira. 332–34. London: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehrensberger-Dow, M.
2020 “Translation, Ergonomics and Cognition”. In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Edited by Favio Alves & Arnt Jakobsen. 147–160. New York-London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen & Sharon O’Brien
2015 “Ergonomics of the Translation Workplace: Potential for cognitive friction.” Translation Spaces 4(1): 98–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Engelbart, Doug C.
1962 Augmenting Human Intellect: A conceptual framework. Menlo Park, CA: Standford Research Institute. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta
2010 “Translation Process.” In Handbook of Translation Studies. Edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer. 406–411. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Firat, Gökhan
2021 “Uberization of Translation: Impact on working conditions.” JIAL 8(1): 48–75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gambier, Yves
2012 “Denial of Translation and Desire to Translate.” Vertimo Studijos 51: 9–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graça, João
2018 “Unbabel: How to Combine AI with the Crowd to Scale Professional-quality translation.” In Proceedings of the association for machine translation in the Americas (AMTA 2018) workshop on translation quality estimation and automatic post-editing, Association for Machine Translation in the Americas, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, pp. 41–85Google Scholar
Hollan, James, Edwin Hutchins and David Kirsh
2000 “Distributed Cognition: Toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research.” ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction TOCHI 72, 174–196. [URL]. DOI logo
Hutchins, Edwin
1995 Cognition in the Wild. MIT press.Google Scholar
2014 “The Cultural Ecosystem of Human Cognition”. Philosophical Psychology 271: 34–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kruger, Haidee
2016 “What’s Happening When Nothing’s Happening? Combining eyetracking and keylogging to explore cognitive processing during pauses in translation production.” Across Languages and Cultures 17 (1): 25–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krüger, Ralph
2019 “Augmented Translation – eine Bestandsaufnahme des rechnergestützten Fachübersetzungsprozesses”. Transkom 12 (1): 142–181.Google Scholar
Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A.
2017 Crowdsourcing and Online Collaborative Translation: Expanding the limits of Translation Studies. New York-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2022 “Quo Vadis, Crowdsourcing and Online Collaborative Translation?” INContext: Studies in Translation and Interculturalism 2 (1). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jiménez-Crespo, M. A.
Forthcoming “Of professionals, non-professionals and everything in between: redefining the notion of the ‘translator’ in the crowdsourcing era.” The Translator. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LeBlanc, Matthieu
2017 ““I Can’t Get No Satisfaction’: An Ethnographic Account of Translators’ Experiences of Translation Memory and Shifting Business Practices”. In Human Issues in Translation Technology. Edited by Dorothy Kenny. 45–62. London, Routledge.Google Scholar
Lee, Juyoung et al.
2018 “Holistic Quantified Self Framework for Augmented Human.” Edited by Norbert Streitz & Shinichi Konomi. In Distributed, Ambient and Pervasive Interactions: Technologies and Contexts. Springer, Cham. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levy, Pierre
1997 Collective Intelligence. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
2005 “Collective Intelligence, a Civilization: towards a method of positive interpretation.” International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society 181: 189–198. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 L’intelligence collective: pour une anthropologie du cyberspace. Paris: La Decouverte.Google Scholar
Lommel, Arle
2020 “Augmented Translation: Are we there yet?” [URL]
Mihalache, I.
(2021) “Human and non-human crossover: Translators partnering with digital tools”. In When translation goes digital: Case studies and critical reflections. Edited by R. Desjardins et al. (eds.), 19–43. London: Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moorkens, Joss
2020 “ ‘A Tiny Cog in a Large Machine’ Digital Taylorism in the translation industry”. Translation Spaces 9(1): 12–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Do Carmo, Felix & Joss Moorkens
2022 “Translation’s New High-Tech Clothes”. In The Human Translator in the 2020s. Edited by Garry Massey, Elisa Huertas-Barros & David Katan. 11–26. New York-London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muñoz Martín, Ricardo
2017 “Looking Toward the Future of Cognitive Translation Studies”. In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Edited by John W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira. 555–572. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muñoz Martín, Ricardo & Christian Olalla-Soler
2022 “Translating is not (only) Problem Solving.” Jostrans: Journal of Specialized Translation 381: 1–26.Google Scholar
Nitzke, Jean & Silvia Hansen-Schirra
2021 A Short Guide to Post-editing (Translation and Multilingual Natural Language Processing 16). Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
O’Brien, Sharon
2012 “Translation as Human-Computer Interaction.” Translation Spaces 11: 101–122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2020 “Translation, Human–computer Interaction and Cognition”. In Routledge Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Edited by Fabio Alves & Arnt Jakobsen. 376–388. New York/London: New York. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, Sharon, et al.
2017 “Irritating CAT Tool Features that Matter to Translators.” Hermes Journal of Language and Communication in Business 561:145–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, Sharon
2022 “Augmented Translation: New trend, future trend or just trendy?”. Paper presented at NETTT – New Trends in Translation Technology , Rhodes, Greece, July 4–6, 2022.
O’Brien, Sharon & Owen Conlan
2019 “Moving towards Personalising Translation Technology”. In Moving Boundaries in Translation Studies. Edited by Helle V. Dam, Matilde Nisbeth Brøgger and Karen Korning Zethsen. 81–97. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
O’Hagan, Minako
2011 “Introduction: community translation: translation as a social activity and its possible consequences in the advent of Web 2.0 and beyond.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, 101: 1–10.Google Scholar
Raisamo, Roope et al.
2019 “Human Augmentation: Past, present and future”. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 1311:131–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Risku, Hanna
2014 “Translation Process Research as Interaction Research: From mental to sociocognitive processes.” Minding Translation – MonTI Special Issue 11: 331–353. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Risku, Hanna and Florian Windhager
2013 “Extended Translation: A sociocognitive research agenda”. Target 131: 33–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Risku, Hanna, Regina Rogl & Christina Pein-Webber
2016 “Mutual Dependencies: Centrality in translation networks”. Jostrans: The Journal of Specialized Translation 251: 1–22.Google Scholar
Sadiku, Mathew & Sarham Musa
2021 A Primer on Multiple Intelligences; Springer: Cham, Switzerland. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sakamoto, Aiko
2018 “Disruption in Translator-Client Matching: Paid crowdsourcing platforms vs human project managers.” Revista Tradumàtica: traducció tecnologies de la informació i la comunicació 161: 85–94.Google Scholar
Shadbolt, Sir Nigel, & Roger Hampson
2019 The Digital Ape: How to live (in peace) with smart machines. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sommers, Harold
2003 “The Translator’s Workstation.” In Computers and Translation: A Translators Guide. Edited by Harold Sommers. 13–30. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stanney, Kay, et al.
2009 “Augmented Cognition: an overview”. Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics 51: 195–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suran, Shweta, Vishwajeet Pattanaik, and Dirk Draheim
2020 “Frameworks for Collective Intelligence: A systematic literature review”. ACM Computational Survey 53, 1. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Teixeira, Carlos & Sharon O’Brien
2017 “Investigating the Cognitive Ergonomic Aspects of Translation Tools in a Workplace Setting”. Translation Spaces, 6 (1), 79–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whitaker, Robert, Martin Chorley and Stuart Allen
2015 “New Frontiers for Crowdsourcing: The extended mind.” In Proceedings of the System Sciences HICSS, 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciencies, p. 1635–1644. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Jianje & Vilma L. Patel
2006 “Distributed Cognition, Representation, and Affordance”. Pragmatics & Cognition 14(2): 333–341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwischenberger, Cornelia
2021 “Online Collaborative Translation: Its ethical, social, and conceptual conditions and consequences.” Perspectives, 301: 1–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar