Article published in:
Culture & Society issue
[Translation Spaces 4:2] 2015
► pp. 310340
Cited by

Cited by 17 other publications

Deckert, Mikołaj
2020.  In The Palgrave Handbook of Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility,  pp. 483 ff. Crossref logo
Ferreira, Aline & John W. Schwieter
2017.  In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition,  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Halverson, Sandra L.
2017.  In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition,  pp. 193 ff. Crossref logo
Halverson, Sandra L.
2019. ‘Default’ translation. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 2:2  pp. 187 ff. Crossref logo
Hansen‐Schirra, Silvia
2017.  In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition,  pp. 232 ff. Crossref logo
Hatzidaki, Anna
2019. Using experimental approaches to study translation. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 2:1  pp. 35 ff. Crossref logo
Heilmann, Arndt, Tatiana Serbina, Daniel Couto Vale & Stella Neumann
2019. Shorter than a text, longer than a sentence. Target 31:1  pp. 98 ff. Crossref logo
Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A.
2020. The “technological turn” in translation studies. Translation Spaces 9:2  pp. 314 ff. Crossref logo
Jääskeläinen, Riitta
2016.  In Reembedding Translation Process Research [Benjamins Translation Library, 128],  pp. 89 ff. Crossref logo
Kruger, Haidee & Jan‐Louis Kruger
2017.  In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition,  pp. 71 ff. Crossref logo
Martín, Ricardo Muñoz
2017.  In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition,  pp. 555 ff. Crossref logo
Marín García, Álvaro
2019. The opportunities of epistemic pluralism for Cognitive Translation Studies. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 2:2  pp. 165 ff. Crossref logo
Mellinger, Christopher D.
2018. Re-thinking translation quality. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 30:2  pp. 310 ff. Crossref logo
Molés-Cases, Teresa
2019. Why typology matters: a corpus-based study of explicitation and implicitation of Manner-of-motion in narrative texts. Perspectives 27:6  pp. 890 ff. Crossref logo
Muñoz Martín, Ricardo
2016. Of minds and men – computers and translators. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 52:2 Crossref logo
Schwieter, John W. & Aline Ferreira
2017.  In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition,  pp. 144 ff. Crossref logo
Vandevoorde, Lore
2019. Register, Source Language, and Cognateness Effects on Lexical Choice in Translated Dutch. Meta 63:3  pp. 627 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 april 2021. 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

Alves, Fabio, Adriana Pagano, Stella Neumann, Erich Steiner, and Silvia Hansen-Schirra
2010 “Translation Units and Grammatical Shifts. Towards an Integration of Product - and Process-Based Translation Research. In Translation and Cognition, edited by Gregory Shreve and Erik Angelone, 109–142. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Arppe, Antii, Gaëtanelle Gilquin, Dylan Glynn, Martin Hilpert, and Arne Zeschel
2010 “Cognitive Corpus Linguistics: Five Points of Debate on Current Theory and Methodology. Corpora 5 (1): 1–27. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baker, Mona
1993 “Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies: Implications and Applications. In In Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair, edited by Mona Baker, Gill Francis, and Elena Tognini-Bonelli, 233–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Balling, Laura Winther, Kristian Tangsgaard Hjelpelund, and Annette C. Sjørup
2014 “Evidence of Parallel Processing During Translation. Meta 59 (2): 234–259. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bernardini, Silvia, and Adriano Ferraresi
2011 “Practice, Description and Theory Come Together: Normalization or Interference in Italian Technical Translation? META 56 (2): 226–246. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brownlie, Siobhan
2003 “Investigating Explanations of Translational Phenomena. A Case for Multiple Causality. Target 15 (1): 111–152. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brysbaert, Marc, Eef Ameel, and Gert Storms
2014 “Semantic Memory and Bilingualism: a Review of the Literature and a New Hypothesis. Accessed 3 April 2014. crr​.ugent​.be​/papers​/Brysbaert​_et​_al​_2014​_semantic​_memory​_and​_bilingualism​.pdf.
Campbell, Stuart
2000“Choice Network Analysis in Translation Research. In Intercultural Faultlines. Research Models in Translation Studies I. Textual and Cognitive Aspects, edited by Maeve Olohan, 29–42. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
1999 “A Cognitive Approach to Source Text Difficulty in Translation. Target 11 (1): 33–63. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carl, Michael
2012 “The CRITT TPR-DB 1.0: A Database for Empirical Human Translation Process Research. In Proceedings of the AMTA 2012 Workshop on Post-Editing Technology and Practice (SPTP 2012), edited by Sharon O’Brien, Michel Simard, and Lucia Specia, 9–18. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Machine Translation in the Americas (AMTA).Google Scholar
Carl, Michael, and Barbara Dragsted
2012 “Inside the Monitor Model: Processes of Default and Challenged Translation Production. Translation: Computation, Corpora, Cognition 2 (1): 127–145.Google Scholar
Carl, Michael, and Moritz Schaeffer
Forthcoming. “Processes of Literal Translation and Post-editing. In Translation in Transition edited by Arnt Lykke Jakobsen and Bartolomé Mesa Lao Amsterdam John Benjamins
Catford, J.C.
1965A Linguistic Theory of Translation: An Essay in Applied Linguistics. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
[1965] 2000 “Translation Shifts. In The Translation Studies Reader, edited by Lawrence Venuti, 141–147. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew
1998Contrastive Functional Analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2000 “A Causal Model for Translation Studies. In Intercultural Faultlines. Research Models in Translation Studies I. Textual and Cognitive Aspects, edited by Maeve Olohan, 15–27. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
2011 “Reflections on the Literal Translation Hypothesis. In Methods and Strategies of Process Research, edited by Cecilia Alvstad, Adelina Hild, and Elisabet Tiselius, 23–35. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Christoffels, Ingrid, and Annette de Groot
2005 “Simultaneous Interpreting: A Cognitive Perspective. In Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches, edited by Judith F. Kroll and Annette M.B. de Groot, 454–479. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Delaere, Isabelle, and Gert De Sutter
2013 “Applying a Multidimensional, Register-Sensitive Approach to Visualize Normalization in Translated and Non-translated Dutch. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 27: 43–60. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Delaere, Isabelle, Gert De Sutter, and Koen Plevoets
2012 “Is Translated Language More Standardized than Non-Translated Language? Using Profile-Based Correspondence Analysis for Measuring Distance between Language Varieties. Target 24 (2): 203–224. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
De Groot, Annette
2011Language and Cognition in Bilinguals and Multilinguals. An Introduction. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Dong, Yanping, Shichun Gui, and Brian MacWhinney
2005 “Shared and Separate Meanings in the Bilingual Lexicon. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 8 (3): 221–238. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta
2005Expertise and Explicitation in the Translation Process. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Finkbeiner, M., K.I. Forster, J. Nicol, and K. Nakamura
2004 “The Role of Polysemy in Masked Semantic and Translation Priming. Journal of Memory and Language 51: 1–22. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Francis, Wendy S., Natasha Tokowicz, and Judith Kroll
2014 “The Consequences of Language Proficiency and Difficulty of Lexical Access for Translation Performance and Priming. Memory and Cognition 42: 27–40. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk
2006Words and Other Wonders. Papers on Lexical and Semantic Topics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th
2010 “Useful Statistics for Corpus Linguistics. In A Mosaic of Corpus Linguistics: Selected Approaches, edited by Aquilino Sánchez and Moisés Almela, 269–291. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Gries, Stephan Th., and Dagmar S. Divjak
2010 “Quantitative Approaches in Usage-Based Cognitive Semantics: Myths, Erroneous Assumptions, and a Proposal. In Cognitive Linguistics Research: Quantitative Methods in Cognitive Semantics: Corpus-Driven Approaches, edited by Dylan Glynn and Kerstin Fischer, 333–353. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, François
2012 “Bilingual and Monolingual Language Modes. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, edited by Carol A. Chapelle. London: Blackwell. Accessed June 10, 2015. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Halverson, Sandra
1997 “The Concept of Equivalence in Translation Studies: Much Ado about Something. Target 9 (2): 207–233. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003“The Cognitive Basis of Translation Universals. Target 15(2): 197–241. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009 “Elements of Doctoral Training: The Dynamics of the Research Process. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 3 (1): 79–106 CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 “Cognitive Translation Studies: Developments in Theory and Method. In Translation and Cognition, edited by Gregory Shreve and Erik Angelone, 349–369. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011“Schematic Networks in Translation: Bringing Together Process and Corpus Data. Paper presented at Text-process-text, Stockholm, 17-19 November 2011.
Forthcoming a. “The status of Contrastive Data in Translation Studies. Forthcoming in Across Languages and Cultures. Crossref
Forthcoming b. “Developing a Cognitive Semantic Model: Magnetism, Gravitational Pull and Questions of Data and Method. Forthcoming in New Ways of Analysing Translational Behaviour in Corpus-Based Translation Studies edited by Gert de Sutter, Isabelle Delaere, and Marie-Aude Lefer Berlin Mouton de Gruyter
Hareide, Lidun
2014Testing the Gravitational Pull Hypothesis in Translation. A Corpus Based Study of the Gerund in Translated Spanish. Doctoral dissertation, University of Bergen.Google Scholar
Hartsuiker, Robert J., and Martin J. Pickering
2008 “Language Interaction in Bilingual Sentence Production. Acta Psychologica 128: 479–489. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hartsuiker, Robert J., Martin J. Pickering, and Eline Veltkamp
2004 “Is Syntax Separate or Shared Between Languages? Cross-linguistic Priming in Spanish-English Bilinguals. Psychological Science, 15 (6): 409–414. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heylen, Kris, José Tummers, and Dirk Geeraerts
2008 “Methodological Issues in Corpus-Based Cognitive Linguistics. In Cognitive Sociolinguistics. Language Variation, Cultural Models, Social Systems, edited by Gitte Kristiansen and René Dirven, 91–127. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ivir, Vladimir
1981 “Formal Correspondence vs. Translation Equivalence Revisited. In Theory of Translation and Intercultural Relations, edited by Itamar Even-Zohar and Gideon Toury, 51–59. Tel Aviv: Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics, Tel Aviv University.Google Scholar
1997 “Formal/Contrastive Correspondence and Translation Equivalence. Studia Romanica et Anglica Zagreviensa XLII: 167–180.Google Scholar
Jääskeläinen, Riitta
1993 “Investigating Translation Strategies. In Recent trends in Empirical Translation Research, edited by Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit and John Laffling, 99–120. Joensuu: University of Joensuu.Google Scholar
Koppel, Moshe, and Noam Ordan
2011 “Translationese and its Dialects. Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics , 1318–1326. Portland, OR: Association for Computational Linguistics.
Krings, Hans-Peter
1986Was in der Köpfen von Übersetzern vorgeht? Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Kroll, Judith F., and Erika Stewart
1994 “Category Interference in Translation and Picture Naming: Evidence for Asymmetric Connections between Bilingual Memory Representation. Journal of Memory and Language 33: 149–174. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kroll, Judith F., and Natasha Tokowicz
2005 “Models of Bilingual Representation and Processing: Looking Back and to the Future. In Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches, edited by Judith F. Kroll and Annettee M.B. de Groot, 531–553. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kruger, Alet, Kim Wallmach, and Jeremy Munday
2012Corpus-based Translation Studies. Research and Applications. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Kruger, Haidee, and Bertus van Rooy
2012 “Register and the Features of Translated Language. Across Languages and Cultures 13 (1): 33–65. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krzeszowski, Thomas P.
1990Contrasting Languages. The Scope of Contrastive Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Ronald
1987/1991Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Volumes I and II. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
2008Cognitive Grammar. A Basic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Laviosa, Sara
2011 “Corpus-based Translation Studies: Where Does it Come From? Where is it Going? In Corpus-based Translation Studies. Research and Applications, edited by Alet Kruger, Kim Wallmach, and Jeremy Munday, 13–32. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
2009 “Universals. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, edited by Mona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha, 306–310. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Laxén, Jannika, and Jean Marc Lavaur
2010 “The Role of Semantics in Translation Recognition: Effects of Number of Translations, Dominance of Translations and Semantic Relatedness of Multiple Translations. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 13: 157–183. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Levý, Jiří
1967 “Translation as a Decision Making Process, In To Honor Roman Jakobson, Vol. 2, 1171–1182. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Malmkjær, Kirsten
2011 “Universals. In The Oxford Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Kirsten Malmkjær and Kevin Windle, 83–93. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mauranen, Anna, and Pekka Kujamäki
2004Translation Universals: Do they Exist? Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Matthiesen, Christian
2001 “The Environments of Translation. In Exploring Translation and Multilingual Text Production: Beyond Content, edited by Erich Steiner and Colin Yallop, 41–117. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Muñoz Martín, Ricardo
1995Lingüística para traducir. Barcelona: Teide.Google Scholar
2012 “Just a Matter of Scope. Mental Load in Translation Process Research. Translation Spaces 1: 169–188. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014 “Situating Translation Expertise: A Review with a Sketch of a Construct. In The Development of Translation Competence: Theories and Methodologies from Psycholinguistics and Cognitive Science, edited by John Schwieter and Aline Ferreira, 2–57. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Oakes, Michael
1998Statistics for Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Paradis, Michel
1994 “Toward a Neurolinguistic Theory of Simultaneous Translation: The Framework. International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 10: 319–335.Google Scholar
Pavlenko, Aneta
2009The Bilingual Mental Lexicon. Interdisciplinary Approaches. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Pavlović, Nataša, and Goranka Antunović
2013 “The Effect of Interpreting Experience on Distance Dynamics: Testing the Literal Translation Hypothesis. Translation and Interpreting Studies 8 (2): 233–252. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, Martin J., and Victor S. Ferreira
2008 “Structural Priming: A Critical Review. Psychological Bulletin 134 (3): 427–459. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pym, Anthony
1995 “European Translation Studies, Une Science qui Dérange, and Why Equivalence Needn’t be a Dirty Word. TTR 8 (1): 153–176. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 “On Toury’s Laws of How Translators Translate. In Beyond Descriptive Translation Studies, edited by Anthony Pym, Miriam Schlesinger, and Daniel Simeoni, 311–328. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Risku, Hanna, Florian Windhager, and Matthias Apfelthaler
2013 “A Dynamic Network Model of Translatorial Dognition and Action. Translation Spaces 2: 151–182. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schaeffer, Moritz
2013The Ideal Literal Translation Hypothesis: The Role of Shared Representations During Translation. Doctoral dissertation, University of Leicester.Google Scholar
Schaeffer, Moritz J., and Michael Carl
2013 “Shared Representations and the Translation Process. A Recursive Model. Translation and Interpreting Studies. 8 (2): 169–190. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014 “Measuring the Cognitive Effort of Literal Translation Processes. Workshop on Humans and Computer-Assisted Translation, 29–37. Gothenburg Sweden: Association for Computational Linguistics.
Schaeffer, Mortiz J., Kevin Paterson, Victoria A. McGowan, Sarah J. White, and Kirsten Malmkjær
Forthcoming. “Reading for Translation. Forthcoming in Translation in Transition edited by Arnt Lykke Jakobsen and Bartolomé Mesa Lao Amsterdam John Benjamins
Schoonbaert, Sophie, Walter Duyck, Marc Brysbaert, and Robert J. Hartsuiker
2009 “Semantic and Translation Priming from a First Language to a Second and Back: Making Sense of the Findings. Memory and Cognition 37 (5): 569–586. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sjørup, Annette C.
2013Cognitive Effort in Metaphor Translation. An Eye-tracking and Key- logging Study. Doctoral dissertation, Copenhagen Business School.Google Scholar
Shuttleworth, Mark, and Moira Cowie
1997Dictionary of Translation Studies. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.Google Scholar
Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja
2004 “Unique Items – Over- or Under-represented in Translated Language? In Translation Universals. Do they Exist?, edited by Anna Mauranen and Pekka Kujamäki, 177–184. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005 “The Monitor Model Revised: Evidence from Process Research. META 50 (2): 405–414. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja, Jukka Mäkisalo, and Sini Immonen
2008 “The Translation Process– Interplay between Literal Rendering and a Search for Sense. Across Languages and Cultures 9 (1): 1–15. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Toury, Gideon
2004 “Probabilistic Explanations in Translation Studies. Welcome as they are, Would they Qualify as Universals? In Translation Universals. Do they Exist?, edited by Anna Mauranen and Pekka Kujamäki, 15–31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tummers, José, Kris Heylen, and Dirk Geeraerts
2005 “Usage-Based Approaches in Cognitive Linguistics: A Technical State of the Art. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 1 (2): 225–261. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vinay, Jean-Paul, and Jean Darbelnet
1995Comparative Stylistics of French and English. A Methodology for Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Volansky, Vered, Noam Ordan, and Shuly Wintner
2013 “On the Features of Translationese. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 30 (1): 98–118. CrossrefGoogle Scholar