Cover not available

Article In: Translation Spaces: Online-First Articles

When machines cannot stay silent

Exploring creative omissions and spectral material in translation

ORCiD logo with link | Universitat de València
 | Universitat de València
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
Abstract
This study examines creativity in translation by analysing absences and disrupting presences in literary texts. It introduces the concepts of “creative omission” and “spectral material”, applying them to the analysis of five discourse markers in the EN–CAT triple-aligned corpus COVALT. Quantitative techniques, including percentage analysis and chi-square tests, are combined with qualitative case studies to compare human translations and machine output. This analysis is further complemented with a pilot study involving LLMs to test the validity of the results against the current technological scenario. Two hypotheses are tested, both of which are validated by the findings. The Creative Silence hypothesis posits that human translators employ significantly more creative omissions and demonstrate an ability to recognise “when to stay silent”. The Spectral Material hypothesis, by contrast, postulates that machine-generated output tends towards non-creative solutions that generate “spectral” effects. The study further characterises machine translationese as being misaligned with the interpretive and embodied practices that underpin human translation.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Discourse markers, the translation of feigned orality, and timely silences
    • 2.1Discourse markers
    • 2.2Feigned orality, narrative voices and discourse markers
    • 2.3Creative omissions vs. spectral material
  • 3.Materials and methods
    • 3.1Corpus data
    • 3.2Research questions, hypotheses and procedure
  • 4.Creative omissions: A comparison between human translations and machine outputs
    • 4.1Creative and non-creative translations
    • 4.2Creative omissions: Human translation
    • 4.3Creative omissions: Machine output
    • 4.4Comparison between human translation and machine output
    • 4.5Pilot study with LLMs
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • Author queries
  • References
References (37)
References
Aijmer, Karin & Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie. 2006. Pragmatic markers in contrast. Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Andaluz-Pinedo, Olga. 2026. “Theatre and Prefabricated Orality: A Corpus-Based Study of English–Spanish Discourse Marker Translation.” Íkala, Revista de Lenguaje y Cultura 31 (1). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baños, Rocío. 2024. La oralidad prefabricada en la ficción audiovisual original y doblada: Siete vidas y Friends. Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beeching, Kate, and Ulrich Detges, eds. 2014. Discourse Functions at the Left and Right Periphery: Crosslinguistic Investigations of Language Use and Language Change. Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane. 2002. Relevance and linguistic meaning: The semantics and pragmatics of discourse markers. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brumme, Jenny, and Elina Bernal. 2010. “Monólogo teatral y mímesis de la oralidad.” In Construir, deconstruir y reconstruir: mímesis y traducción de la oralidad y la afectividad, edited by G. Andújar and J. Brumme, 95–119. Frank & Timme.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brumme, Jenny, and Hildegard Resinger, eds. 2008. La oralidad fingida: obras literarias: descripción y traducción. Iberoamericana/Vervuert.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel. 2010. “Discourse Markers. Historical pragmatics.” In Historical Pragmatics, edited by Andreas H. Jucker, Irma Taavitsainen, 285–314. De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cassin, Barbara. 2016. “Translation as Paradigm for Human Sciences.” The Journal of Speculative Philosophy 30 (3): 242–66.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chaume, Frederic. 2004a. Cine y traducción. Cátedra.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004b. “Discourse Markers in Audiovisual Translating.” Meta 49 (4): 843–55.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Foran, Lisa. 2023. “Untranslatability and the ethics of pause.” Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice, 31(1), 44–58. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce. (1996). “Pragmatic markers”. Pragmatics, 6, 167–190.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1999. “What Are Discourse Markers?” Journal of Pragmatics 31 (7): 931–52. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. “An Account of Discourse Markers.” International Review of Pragmatics 1 (2): 293–320. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fried, Mirjam & Östman, Jan-Ola. 2005. “Construction Grammar and spoken language: The case of pragmatic particles.” Journal of pragmatics, 37 (11), 1752–1778.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guerberof-Arenas, Ana, and Antonio Toral. 2020. “The Impact of Post-editing and Machine Translation on Creativity and Reading Experience.” Translation Spaces 9 (2): 255–82. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2022. “Creativity in Translation: Machine Translation as a Constraint for Literary Texts.” Translation Spaces 11 (2): 184–212. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guest, Olivia, Marcela Suarez, and Iris van Rooij. 2025. Towards Critical Artificial Intelligence Literacies. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gutiérrez Lanza, Camino. 2023. “Film Dialogue Synchronization and Statistical Dubbese: A Corpus-Based Pilot Study of English-Spanish Conversational Markers. In Corpus Use in Cross-linguistic Research, 124–41. John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hrnčíř, Lukáš and Gabriela Zapletalová. 2023. “Translating discourse markers: A parallel corpus analysis of connective functions of anyway in Czech fiction and subtitles.” Ostrava Journal of English Philology 15: 59–76. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kranich, Svenja. 2014. “Translations as a Locus of Language Contact.” In Translation: A Multidisciplinary Approach, edited by J. House, 96–115. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, Katherine, Orhan Firat, Ashish Agarwal, Clara Fannjiang, and David Sussillo. 2018. “Hallucinations in Neural Machine Translation.” OpenReview, September. [URL]
Luo, Jiaming, Colin Cherry, and George Foster. 2024. “To diverge or not to diverge: A morphosyntactic perspective on machine translation vs human translation.” Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 12:355–371.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marco, Josep. 2021. “Machine-Translationese in the English-Catalan Sub-Corpus of COVALT.” Paper presented at the PETRA-E Conference 2021, Trinity College Dublin, November 4–5.
. 2024. “Methodology.” In Towards an Empirical Verification of the Gravitational Pull Hypothesis, edited by Josep Marco and Isabel Tello, 53–76. Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2026. “Modal markers, aspect and light verb constructions in literary texts as testing ground for the machine translationese hypothesis.” Across Languages and Cultures. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marco, Josep, and Ulrike Oster. 2022. “Passive Construal as Testing Ground for the Gravitational Pull Hypothesis and Machine-Translationese in the COVALT Corpus.” Paper presented at the Translation in Transition 6 conference, Prague, September 22–23.
Marco, Josep, and Maria Ferragud. 2024. “Adjective Position in Catalan as a Testing Ground for the Gravitational Pull and Machine-Translationese Hypotheses.” In Towards an Empirical Verification of the Gravitational Pull Hypothesis, 205–30. Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Molines-Galarza, Núria. 2025. Jacques Derrida y la traducción deconstructiva. Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morillas, Esther. 2016. “Oralidad y narración: Un estudio de caso.” MonTI, Special Issue 3: 55–75.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ortega y Gasset, José. 1983. Obras completas. Vol. 5. Alianza.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Romero-Fresco, Pablo. 2009. “Naturalness in the Spanish Dubbing Language.” Meta 54 (1): 49–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schellheimer, Silke. 2016. La función evocadora de la fraseología en la oralidad ficcional y su traducción. Vol. 82. Frank & Timme.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah. 1987. Discourse Markers. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vanmassenhove, Eva, Dimitar Shterionov, and Matthew Gwilliam. 2021. “Machine Translationese: Effects of Algorithmic Bias on Linguistic Complexity in Machine Translation.” In Proceedings of EACL 2021, 2203–13. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vanmassenhove, Eva. 2025. “Losing our Tail –Again: On (Un)Natural Selection And Multilingual Large Language Models.” ArXiv. arxiv.org.[URL]
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold-dark jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold-light jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold prag Twitter_Logo_Blue