Article published in:
The Development of Professional Competence
Edited by Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow, Birgitta Englund Dimitrova and Séverine Hubscher-Davidson
[Translation and Interpreting Studies 9:1] 2014
► pp. 88108
Cited by

Cited by 8 other publications

Abdel Latif, Muhammad M. M.
2018. Towards a typology of pedagogy-oriented translation and interpreting research. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 12:3  pp. 322 ff. Crossref logo
Bisiada, Mario
2018. Editing nominalisations in English−German translation: when do editors intervene?. The Translator 24:1  pp. 35 ff. Crossref logo
Law, Melanie Ann & Haidee Kruger
2018.  In Innovation and Expansion in Translation Process Research [American Translators Association Scholarly Monograph Series, XVIII],  pp. 241 ff. Crossref logo
Mellinger, Christopher D.
2018. Re-thinking translation quality. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 30:2  pp. 310 ff. Crossref logo
Robert, Isabelle S.
2016. La relecture unilingue : une procédure de révision de traduction rapide, fonctionnelle, mais déloyale. TTR 27:1  pp. 95 ff. Crossref logo
Robert, Isabelle S. & Louise Brunette
2016. Should Revision Trainees Think Aloud while Revising Somebody Else’s Translation? Insights from an Empirical Study with Professionals. Meta 61:2  pp. 320 ff. Crossref logo
Robert, Isabelle S., Aline Remael & Jim J.J. Ureel
2017. Towards a model of translation revision competence. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 11:1  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Schaeffer, Moritz, Anke Tardel, Sascha Hofmann & Silvia Hansen-Schirra
2019.  In Quality Assurance and Assessment Practices in Translation and Interpreting [Advances in Linguistics and Communication Studies, ],  pp. 226 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 november 2020. 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.

References

References

Allal, Linda, Lucile Chanquoy, and Pierre Largy
2004Revision: Cognitive and Instructional Processes. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bell, Roger T.
1991Translation and Translating. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bernardini, Silvia
2002“Think-Aloud Protocols in Translation Research: Achievements, Limits, Future Prospects.” Target 13 (1): 241–263. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bisaillon, Jocelyne
2007“Professional Editing Strategies Used by Six Editors.” Written Communication 24 (4): 295–322. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bowles, Melissa A.
2010The Think-Aloud Controversy in Second Language Research. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Breedveld, Hella
2002“Translation Processes in Time.” Target 14 (2): 221–240. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Breedveld, Hella, and Huub van den Bergh
2002“Revisie in vertaling: wanneer en wat.” Linguistica Antverpiensia New Series 1: 327–345.Google Scholar
Brunette, Louise
2000“Towards a Terminology for Translation Quality Assessment.” The Translator: Studies in Intercultural Communication 6 (2): 169–182.Google Scholar
2002“Normes et censure : ne pas confondre.” TTR: Traduction, Terminologie, Rédaction 15 (2): 223–233. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003“Révision pédagogique et interférences linguistiques.” In La formation à la traduction professionnelle, ed. by Geneviève Mareschal, Louise Brunette, Zélie Guével, and Egan Valentine, 141–151. Ottawa: Les Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa.Google Scholar
Brunette, Louise, Chantal Gagnon, and Jonathan Hine
2005 “The GREVIS Project: Revise or Court Calamity.” Across Languages and Cultures 6 (1): 29–45. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta, and Elisabet Tiselius
2009 “Exploring Retrospection as a Research Method for Studying the Translation Process and the Interpretation Process.” In Methodology, Technology and Innovation in Translation Process Research. A Tribute to Arnt Lykke Jakobsen, ed. by Inger M. Mees, Fabio Alves, and Susanne Göpferich, 109–134. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
Ericsson, Karl A., and Herbert A. Simon
1993Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
European Committee for Standardization
2006European Standard EN 15038. Translation Services - Service Requirements. Brussels: European Committee for Standardization.Google Scholar
Field, Andy
2009Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
Gerloff, Pamela
1988From French to English: A Look at the Translation Process in Students, Bilinguals, and Professional Translators. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Göpferich, Susanne
2008Translationsprozessforschung: Stand, Methoden, Perspektiven. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Göpferich, Susanne, and Riitta Jääskeläinen
2009“Process Research into the Development of Translation Competence: Where Are We, and Where Do We Need to Go?” Across Languages and Cultures 10 (2): 169–191. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Gyde
2009“The Speck in Your Brother’s Eye - The Beam in Your Own. Quality Management in Translation and Revision.” In Efforts and Models in Interpreting and Translation Research: A Tribute to Daniel Gile, ed. by Gyde Hansen, Andrew Chesterman, and Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, 255–280. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, John R., Linda Flower, Karen A. Schriver, James F. Stratman, and Linda Carey
1987 “Cognitive Processes in Revision.” In Advances in Applied Psycholinguistics, ed. by Sheldon Rosenberg, 176–240. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hernández-Morin, Katell
2009“Pratiques et perceptions de la révision en France.” Traduire 2 (221): 58–78. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Horguelin, Paul A., and Louise Brunette
1998Pratique de la révision. Brossard, PQ: Linguatech.Google Scholar
Jakobsen, Arnt L.
1999“Logging Target Text Production with Translog.” In Probing the Process in Translation: Methods and Results, ed. by Gyde Hansen, 9–20. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
2002“Translation Drafting by Professional Translators and by Translation Students.” In Empirical Translation Studies. Process and Product, ed. by Gyde Hansen, 191–204. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
Kiraly, Don
1995Pathways to Translation. Pedagogy and Process. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.Google Scholar
Krings, Hans P.
1988“Blick in die ‘Black Box.’ Eine Fallstudie zum Übersetzungsprozess bei Berufsübersetzern.” In Textlinguistik und Fachsprache. AILA-Symposium , Hildesheim, 13–16 April 1987, ed. by Reiner Arntz, 393–411. Hildesheim: Olms.Google Scholar
2001Repairing Texts: Empirical Investigations of Machine Translation Post-Editing Processes. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.Google Scholar
Künzli, Alexander
2005“What Principles Guide Translation Revision? A Combined Product and Process Study.” In Translation Norms: What Is ‘Normal’ in the Translation Profession? ed. by Ian Kemble, 31–43. Portsmouth: University of Portsmouth.Google Scholar
2006a“Die Loyalitätsbeziehungen der Übersetzungsrevisorin.” In Übersetzen - Translating - Traduire: Towards a ”social turn”?, ed. by Michaela Wolf, 89–98. Wien: LIT-Verlag.Google Scholar
2006b“Teaching and Learning Translation Revision: Some Suggestions Based on Evidence from a Think-Aloud Protocol Study.” In Current Trends in Translation Teaching and Learning, ed. by Mike Garant, 9–24. Helsinki: Helsinki University.Google Scholar
2006c“Translation Revision - A Study of the Performance of Ten Professional Translators Revising a Technical Text.” In Insights into Specialized Translation, ed. by Maurizio Gotti, and Susan Šarčević, 195–214. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2007a“Translation Revision. A Study of the Performance of Ten Professional Translators Revising a Legal Text.” In Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies, Selected Contributions from the EST Congress, Lisbon 2004, ed. by Yves Gambier, Miriam Shlesinger, and Radegundis Stolze, 115–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007b “The Ethical Dimension of Translation Revision. An Empirical Study.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 8: 42–56.Google Scholar
2009“Qualität in der Übersetzungsrevision - eine empirische Studie.” In Translation zwischen Text und Welt: Translationswissenschaft als historische Disziplin zwischen Moderne und Zukunft, ed. by Hartwig Kalverkämper, and Larisa Schippel, 291–303. Berlin: Frank & Timme.Google Scholar
Leijten, Mariëlle, and Luuk Van Waes
2006“Inputlog: New Perspectives on the Logging of On-Line Writing.” In Computer Keystroke Logging and Writing: Methods and Applications, ed. by Kirk P.H. Sullivan, and Eva Lindgren, 73–94. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
2013“Keystroke Logging in Writing Research: Using Inputlog to Analyze and Visualize Writing Processes.” Written Communication 30 (3): 358–392. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mossop, Brian
2001Revising and Editing for Translators. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
2007aRevising and Editing for Translators (2nd edition). Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
2007b“Empirical Studies of Revision: What We Know and Need to Know.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 8: 5–20.Google Scholar
Norberg, Ulf
2003Übersetzen mit doppeltem Skopos. Eine empirische Prozess- und Produktsudie. Uppsala: Uppsala University.Google Scholar
Nord, Christiane
2005Text Analysis in Translation: Theory, Methodology, and Didactic Application of a Model for Translation-oriented Text Analysis. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Parra Galiano, Silvia
2006“La revisión y otros procedimientos para el aseguramiento de la calidad de la traducción en el ámbito profesional.” Turjuman 15 (2): 11–48.Google Scholar
2007a“La revisión como procedimiento para el aseguramiento de la calidad de la traducción: grados, tipos y modalidades de revisión.” SENEZ 32: 97–122.Google Scholar
2007b“Propuesta metodológica para la revisión de traducciones: principios generales y parámetros.” TRANS 11: 197–214.Google Scholar
Robert, Isabelle S.
2008“Translation Revision Procedures: An Explorative Study.” In Translation and Its Others. Selected Papers of the CETRA Research Seminar in Translation Studies 2007, ed. by Pieter Boulogne. Accessed October 24, 2013. Retrieved from http://​www​.arts​.kuleuven​.be​/cetra​/papers​/files​/robert​.pdf.Google Scholar
2012La révision en traduction : les procédures de révision et leur impact sur le produit et le processus de révision. Ph.D. dissertation, Universiteit Antwerpen.Google Scholar
Robert, Isabelle S, and Luuk Van Waes
2014“Selecting a translation revision procedure: do common sense and statistics agree?”. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology, Crossref.Google Scholar
Segers, Winibert
2007“IJkpuntenmethode.” In Vertalingen objectief evalueren. Matrices en ijkpunten, ed. by Chris Van de Poel, and Winibert Segers, 21–25. Leuven: Acco.Google Scholar
Shih, Claire Y.
2006“Revision from Translators’ Point of View. An Interview Study.” Target 18 (2): 295–312. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thaon, Brenda, and Paul A. Horguelin
1980A Practical Guide to Bilingual Revision. Montreal: Linguatech.Google Scholar
Wilss, Wolfram
1996Knowledge and Skills in Translator Behaviour. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wølch Rasmussen, Kirsten, and Anne Schjoldager
2011 “Revising Translations. A Survey of Revision Policies in Danish Translation Companies.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 15: 87–120.Google Scholar